bug#38886: (read-variable) documentation doesn't match behavior

bug#38886: (read-variable) documentation doesn't match behavior

[Douglas Lewan]

According to the documentation for (read-variable), this sexp 
(read-variable "?" '(all one top)) should return all if there's no 
input. It, however, signals an error instead: Wrong type argument: 
stringp, all. Indeed, this sexp (read-variable "?" '("all" "one" "top")) 
does return the symbol all

I'm guessing that that is in fact the intended behavior. (In the C code 
that seems to be the case.) However, the documentation is ambiguous. The 
first paragraph of the documentation would better end "... if it is a 
list of strings."

-- 
,Doug
d.lewan2000@gmail.com
(908) 720 7908

bug#38886: (read-variable) documentation doesn't match behavior

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Douglas Lewan <d.lewan2000@gmail.com> writes:

> According to the documentation for (read-variable), this sexp
> (read-variable "?" '(all one top)) should return all if there's no
> input. It, however, signals an error instead: Wrong type argument:
> stringp, all. Indeed, this sexp (read-variable "?" '("all" "one"
> "top")) does return the symbol all
>
> I'm guessing that that is in fact the intended behavior. (In the C
> code that seems to be the case.) However, the documentation is
> ambiguous. The first paragraph of the documentation would better end
> "... if it is a list of strings."

Yup.  I've now fixed the doc string in the way you suggest in Emacs 28.

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