[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Recent change to describe-variable

From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: Re: Recent change to describe-variable
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 16:46:50 +0200

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 15:03, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:

> Oh, are we now installing things at the request of one Emacs user/developer?
> Someone has an idea s?he thinks is good, so it's installed as part of Emacs?

Please try to control yourself, at least if you're interested in discussion.

Ted asked it, and there was a bit of exchange; you've read it. The
patch was installed and nobody complained until now; and the complain
has not been caused by the keywords, but becase the lexbind-new change
is stricter.

> Keywords with a doc string and without.  I agree with the post below by Stefan
> to the cited thread: if it has a doc string, include it.  And even if it 
> doesn't
> have a doc string, include it ("No documentation" is useful information.)

No, it's not, because I'm reasonably sure in all the Emacs sources
there's not a single case of a keyword constant with a docstring; I
suspect there's even no case of (defconst :x :x). So having a
docstring would be information, but not having one is just noise.

> Especially as a replacement for `describe-variable'.

I'm still trying to understand how can you defend so strenuously for
describe-variable to describe things that are not variables; the fact
that (defconst :x :x) is even allowed is just a relic from the past.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]