From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17623: 24.4.50; incorrect example for `apply-partially' in (elisp) `Calling Functions' Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 20:54:55 +0300 Message-ID: <831r4b62z4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9fd43ff1-d6cf-4ac6-b173-2fd634f45a98@default> <871tua2o12.fsf@web.de> <1ac7ebe5-6b43-4367-beb8-df7d9f5b6750@default> <87tx75ni8k.fsf@web.de> <8338ep6kk1.fsf@gnu.org> <87pphsor8h.fsf@web.de> <83tx746fgd.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee8cyt1m.fsf@web.de> <83bl3g55t5.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilxnuczs.fsf@web.de> <835ytn6fzy.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgqzsqt6.fsf@web.de> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14919"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 17623@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 23 19:56:10 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFa-0003gv-3b for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 19:56:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52654 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFY-0008AB-Bm for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:56:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53148) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFS-00089l-1W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:56:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:53824) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFR-0001BB-On for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:56:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFR-00058C-MN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:56:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 17:56:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17623 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 17623-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17623.163501175519711 (code B ref 17623); Sat, 23 Oct 2021 17:56:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17623) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Oct 2021 17:55:55 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37137 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFL-00057r-GI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:55:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55780) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFI-00057c-L2 for 17623@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:55:54 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39482) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1meLFB-0000Jq-9n; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:55:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=1718 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1meLEZ-000529-Vw; Sat, 23 Oct 2021 13:55:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87zgqzsqt6.fsf@web.de> (message from Michael Heerdegen on Sat, 23 Oct 2021 17:29:09 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:218013 Archived-At: > From: Michael Heerdegen > Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 17623@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 17:29:09 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > > But Emacs' `1+' accepts one argument. > > > > Why does it matter? > > Because the text talks about the number of accepted arguments, right in > the preceding lines. The text talks about the variant of 1+ shown in the text, not about the built-in 1+. > > Anyway, you are saying that, because the description in the manual > > doesn't pedantically cover the case of functions that can accept any > > number of arguments, it is incorrect? Really?? > > Can't you image that some people might have a look at the number of > accepted arguments of the example -- directly after we talked about the > number of accepted arguments of the result of an `apply-partially' call > -- to check if they understood the paragraph correctly? Is this really > that far fetched? No, it isn't far-fetched. But what problem will those people find? that infinity - 1 = infinity? isn't that obvious? > > I'm sorry for this lecture, but it is my impression that you sometimes > > forget about this when you talk about our documentation -- this is not > > the first time we argue about similar stuff for similar reasons. > > You don't seem to want to consider that what is a simplification for one > makes the thing harder to understand for others. Such simplifications make it harder to understand only for those who already know what the function does. They might feel uneasy about the simplification because they could think it simplifies too much. Like I feel whenever I read that analogy about space-time curvature. But this text is not written for people who already know, it is written for those who don't. > We should aim for a documentation that is good for learning for > everyone, not only for people who think and learn like you. Feel free to suggest text which will do that. The only way I know of for doing that is to follow a simplified description with a small print saying something like "This is not entirely accurate; the truth is that ..." etc. (That is not what you proposed, and my response was to what you actually proposed.) If you think that would be useful, we could add such a text, if someone submits it. > Really, I'm a bit irritated about your reactions. Yes, I've noticed. It doesn't help. > Is my way of learning and reading wrong in your eyes? If I say I > find that text or detail confusing - is it just that this can't be > true, and that's it? Or my mistake? Or does it not matter? I hope I answered these questions above.