[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Solved] (was: Prefix-Arg (non-interactive!) in Info)

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: [Solved] (was: Prefix-Arg (non-interactive!) in Info)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:05:50 +0300

> From: Memnon Anon <>
> Cc:
> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 22:58:11 +0200
> w.r.t. Bug report, no, I would not do that.
> I am no programmer, I hardly ever write anything from scratch; I modify
> existing code for my own needs and at best effort. Imho, for reporting
> Bugs like this, a more profound level of expertise is needed or you are 
> most certainly waisting a developers precious time.

I urge you to reconsider.  Sending an email saying that the doc string
of org-clock-in does not say what value to assign to the SELECT
argument in a non-interactive call does not need any high level of
expertise.  If a doc string does not explain what are the valid
values of the function's arguments, then that doc string needs to be
improved.  Documenting this is the absolute minimum of any doc string;
without that, the doc string is useless.  It is sometimes okay to omit
these details if the valid values are clear from the text and the
context.  But I cannot see how someone could claim that the value '(4)
could be "clear".

reply via email to

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