bug#46627: [PATCH] Add new help command 'describe-command'

[Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>]

On 01.03.2021 08:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>>>> Do you have in mind some particular "completion alternative we have
>>>> already" for 'describe-command'?
>>>
>>> icomplete.el, completion.el, pcomplete.el, and the non-default styles
>>> in completion-styles-alist come to mind.
>>
>> All of these (with possible exception of completion.el, which I'm not
>> familiar with) determine how completions are shown and/or how matching
>> is performed, but the total set of completions (completion table) is
>> determined by the command the user invokes.
> 
> The completion style does determine the set of candidates, if that's
> the only aspect you are interested in. 

Completion style only determines how completions are matched, but not 
the total set of them. That's defined either by the completion table, or 
by a completion predicate.

> And the way the candidates are
> presented is an important part of how easy and user-friendly discovery
> is.

Of course.

>> So they don't include anything that looks like a replacement for
>> 'describe-command'.
> 
> I wasn't talking only about describe-command, not even in particular
> about it.  I was talking about a much more general issue.  If
> describe-command is the only addition, then I have no problems with
> that; I only care if that command is the tip of a much larger iceberg.

I don't think it's going to be.

Even if we wanted, there are only so many free key bindings anyway. And 
having more and more commands, bound to different keys, is not actually 
something that's going to help a new user get oriented quickly.