bug#15832: 24.3.50; doc of `up-list' and moving by "parens"

bug#15832: 24.3.50; doc of `up-list' and moving by "parens"

[Drew Adams]

1. The doc strings of `up-list' and similar commands do not make clear
that the movement is not necessarily about parentheses (in spite of the
command names).  As (emacs) `Moving by Parens' takes care to say, such
commands "move over groupings delimited by parentheses (or whatever else
serves as delimiters in the language you are working with)."  The
information in parentheses in this phrase is what is missing from the
doc strings.

2. `up-list' should be added to the list of commands mentioned in
(emacs) `Moving by Parens'.  `down-list' and `backward-up-list' are
mentioned, but not `up-list'.

Emacs Lisp is a big part of Emacs, yet the only place where `up-list' is
mentioned in the Emacs manual is in node `Tex Editing', where it is
described as "moving forward past the close brace."  `Moving by Parens'
is a reasonable place to mention `up-list'.

3. (elisp) `List Motion' mentions that the syntax table controls which
characters are treated like parentheses, which is good.  It then
cross-references (emacs) `Moving by Parens' "for user-level commands."

It is good to cross-reference, but what are described at (elisp) `List
Motion' *are* user-level commands, so the characterization "for
user-level commands" is confusing and misleading.  The cross reference
should just say "see also".

In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-10-19 on LEG570
Bzr revision: 114715 rgm@gnu.org-20131019023520-s8mwtib7xcx9e05w
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --enable-checking 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1'

bug#15832: 24.3.50; doc of `up-list' and moving by "parens"

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> 1. The doc strings of `up-list' and similar commands do not make clear
> that the movement is not necessarily about parentheses (in spite of the
> command names).  As (emacs) `Moving by Parens' takes care to say, such
> commands "move over groupings delimited by parentheses (or whatever else
> serves as delimiters in the language you are working with)."  The
> information in parentheses in this phrase is what is missing from the
> doc strings.

Fixed on trunk.

> 2. `up-list' should be added to the list of commands mentioned in
> (emacs) `Moving by Parens'.  `down-list' and `backward-up-list' are
> mentioned, but not `up-list'.

`up-list' doesn't have a keyboard definition, which is why it's probably
not documented in the Emacs manual.

> 3. (elisp) `List Motion' mentions that the syntax table controls which
> characters are treated like parentheses, which is good.  It then
> cross-references (emacs) `Moving by Parens' "for user-level commands."
>
> It is good to cross-reference, but what are described at (elisp) `List
> Motion' *are* user-level commands, so the characterization "for
> user-level commands" is confusing and misleading.  The cross reference
> should just say "see also".

The things described in the Emacs manual here are clearly more
user-levelish, so I think that's OK.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

bug#15832: 24.3.50; doc of `up-list' and moving by "parens"

[Drew Adams]

> > 2. `up-list' should be added to the list of commands mentioned in
> > (emacs) `Moving by Parens'.  `down-list' and `backward-up-list'
> > are mentioned, but not `up-list'.
> 
> `up-list' doesn't have a keyboard definition, which is why it's
> probably not documented in the Emacs manual.

It should still be mentioned.

> > 3. (elisp) `List Motion' mentions that the syntax table controls
> > which characters are treated like parentheses, which is good.
> > It then cross-references (emacs) `Moving by Parens' "for
> > user-level commands."
> >
> > It is good to cross-reference, but what are described at (elisp)
> > `List Motion' *are* user-level commands, so the characterization
> > "for user-level commands" is confusing and misleading.  The cross
> > reference should just say "see also".
> 
> The things described in the Emacs manual here are clearly more
> user-levelish, so I think that's OK.

If you want to say "for information about OTHER user-level
commands" or "for more information about these user-level
commands" (depending on which is meant), that would be fine, but
as it stands now it is confusing and misleading, giving
the impression that what are described here might NOT be
user-level commands.