Lispref add-to-list - doc is unnecessary convoluted

[Arthur Miller]

Function: add-to-list symbol element &optional append compare-fn

    This function sets the variable symbol by consing element onto the old 
value, if element is not already a member of that value. It returns the 
resulting list, whether updated or not. The value of symbol had better be a 
list already before the call. add-to-list uses compare-fn to compare element 
against existing list members; if compare-fn is nil, it uses equal.

    Normally, if element is added, it is added to the front of symbol, but if 
the optional argument append is non-nil, it is added at the end.

    The argument symbol is not implicitly quoted; add-to-list is an ordinary 
function, like set and unlike setq. Quote the argument yourself if that is what 
you want.

    Do not use this function when symbol refers to a lexical variable. 

I think this doc is unnecessary convoluted and I don't see reason why it
describes the implementation. That first sentence make something so
simple as add-to-list sound so complicated for some reason when you read
it, and requires one to think twice through what it say (at least me).

Other functions does not do so, so why this one? I don't think it is
necessary since docs anyway says how it add to list (front/back) kist a
three sentences further. 

I think it is more clear to use word 'list' instead of 'symbol' (element
is a symbol too for example). Not least because docs later says: "better
be a list". It clarifies intentions, and hopefully removes the need to say
things like 'better be a list'.

I hope I don't hurt anyone's feelings; I dont' know who wrote it, but I
would like to suggest a slight modification, patch included. I am not
native english speaker, so if you agree to change it, somebody please
look through it.

add-to-list-doc.patch
Description: Text Data