bug#15730: 24.3.50; (emacs) `Query Replace' mentions multi-buffer q-r, but no explanation

bug#15730: 24.3.50; (emacs) `Query Replace' mentions multi-buffer q-r, but no explanation

[Drew Adams]

The descriptions of `Y' and `N' can give the impression that ordinary
`query-replace' (`M-%', `C-M-%') works across multiple buffers.  If it
does then please add an explanation of how to use `M-%' and `C-M-%'
to do that.

I suspect that the text is just not clear that `Y' and `N', and what
is said for them about multiple buffers, is ONLY for other commands,
which happen to be multi-buffer, and is does not apply to `M-%' and
`C-M-%'.

For one thing, whatever commands are pertinent should be mentioned here.
The text says "(like the Dired `Q' command...)".  It should not say
"like", but "such as".  And is that the only such command, or is it
just one example of such a command (in which case, list the others,
or at least provide a link to where they are discussed).

Move the link pointing to `Operating on Files' to the paragraph where
`Q' is mentioned.  Or add a link there and keep also the one at the page
bottom.



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#15730: 24.3.50; (emacs) `Query Replace' mentions multi-buffer q-r, but no explanation

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

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

> The descriptions of `Y' and `N' can give the impression that ordinary
> `query-replace' (`M-%', `C-M-%') works across multiple buffers.  If it
> does then please add an explanation of how to use `M-%' and `C-M-%'
> to do that.
>
> I suspect that the text is just not clear that `Y' and `N', and what
> is said for them about multiple buffers, is ONLY for other commands,
> which happen to be multi-buffer, and is does not apply to `M-%' and
> `C-M-%'.
>
> For one thing, whatever commands are pertinent should be mentioned here.
> The text says "(like the Dired `Q' command...)".  It should not say
> "like", but "such as".  And is that the only such command, or is it
> just one example of such a command (in which case, list the others,
> or at least provide a link to where they are discussed).

It says:

@item Y @r{(Upper-case)}
to replace all remaining occurrences in all remaining buffers in
multi-buffer replacements (like the Dired `Q' command which performs
query replace on selected files).  It answers this question and all
subsequent questions in the series with "yes", without further
user interaction.

---

I fail to see how that could be misinterpreted.

> Move the link pointing to `Operating on Files' to the paragraph where
> `Q' is mentioned.  Or add a link there and keep also the one at the page
> bottom.

  @xref{Operating on Files}, for the Dired @kbd{Q} command which
performs query replace on selected files.  See also @ref{Transforming
File Names}, for Dired commands to rename, copy, or link files by
replacing regexp matches in file names.

Seems to be fixed.  Closing.

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

bug#15730: 24.3.50; (emacs) `Query Replace' mentions multi-buffer q-r, but no explanation

[Drew Adams]

> It says: ...

> I fail to see how that could be misinterpreted.

Try reading the bug report about it.  You might succeed in seeing.
It specifically says how it can be misinterpreted, starting with
its first words:

  "The descriptions of `Y' and `N' can give the impression that
   ordinary `query-replace' (`M-%', `C-M-%') works across multiple
   buffers."

Is it unclear how they can give that impression?  Does reading
their descriptions help?

  `Y (Upper-case)'
   to replace all remaining occurrences in all remaining buffers in
   multi-buffer replacements...

> > Move the link pointing to `Operating on Files' to the paragraph
> > where `Q' is mentioned.  Or add a link there and keep also the
> > one at the page bottom.
>  
> Seems to be fixed.

Not at all.  Read what I wrote.  You just quote the existing doc
that needs to be fixed.  Nothing has been changed at all.

> Closing.

Reopening.  You've done nothing here but close the bug.

I'm sorry to say it, but you don't read the doc (well), and you
don't read the bug reports (well).  You seem to be in a hurry
to close things without bothering to learn about them, let alone 
trying to fix them.

Do you think users write bug reports for fun, or just so you
can close them?  We're trying to improve Emacs, not get an
award for the number of bugs closed without looking.