[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs

From: 조성빈
Subject: Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs
Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 00:07:58 +0900

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> 작성:

From: Jean-Christophe Helary <address@hidden>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 16:47:11 +0900
Cc: Philippe Vaucher <address@hidden>,

For quite a lot of people, this page
http://ergoemacs.org/emacs/elisp_string_functions.html is much simpler
to use & learn from than this page

It does not mean that the later page is bad, it is actually more complete,
better documented, already grouped
in topics... and yet, a lot of people prefer the first page... straight to
the point, simple examples.

Please tell me if you are able to understand this, if you cannot I'll try to
explain further.

I understand this very well, I'm just astonished to hear that this is
all the documentation you and some others want to see or have.

Nobody claimed that it was *all* we want to see or have. Quite the contrary.

Maybe we are in two different discussions, then.  Because the above
clearly says: "this page (ergoemacs) is much simpler to use & learn
from than this page (ELisp)".  IOW, it sees the ergoemacs page as a
better _replacement_ for the ELisp manual.  If this doesn't mean that
the ELisp manual is not needed, then maybe I have basic
misunderstanding of written English.

So to me, the ergoemacs page is useful for various situations like…
* One knows basic Elisp knowledge but have not used any string APIs. So one
  wants to know various operations that Emacs already provides.
* One have already written Elisp to be familiar enough about the string APIs,
  knows that there are APIs that allow replacing string using a regex, but
  doesn’t remember the replace-regexp-in-string name.

The Elisp manual in the other hand, is useful for situations like…
* One wants to know exactly how strings work in Elisp - what happens if the
  argument of string-to-number is a garbage string?
* Would there be some options to number-to-string, like bases? Or should I
  implement them myself?

Or maybe your opinion is different from that of Philippe, but then I
was responding to Philippe, and in any case "nobody claimed" is then
inaccurate, isn't it?

There is a need for such a summary *that also links at the current
documentation*, as I also replied.

That "summary" (regardless of how it is implemented) does not exist today and
that is partly what this whole thread is about.

AFAIU, the request for such a summary is quite new in this discussion,
and is definitely not "what this whole thread is about.".  Most of
this thread is about something entirely different: changing the names
of APIs so that completion could be more useful for discovery.

reply via email to

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