bug#46910: 27.1; (elisp) RX doc

[Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>]

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

> 1. `Rx Constructs' doesn't explain that the "constructs" are used in
> arguments to macro `rx'.
>
> E.g.: "some-string" is not an RX expression.
>       (rx "some-string") is an RX expression.
>
> Please make this clear.
>
> 2. `Rx Constructs': Don't show things like `\sCODE' without saying what
> CODE means.  If the column title for the table explaining RX names is
> `Syntax character' or `Category character' then that's apparently what
> CODE corresponds to for `\sCODE' or `\cCODE'.  But there's no way to
> know that unless you're already familiar with `\s' and `\c' syntax.
>
> 3. `Rx Constructs', `Zero-width assertions': Call this `Zero-width
> matching' or some such.
>
> 4. `Rx Functions': RX-EXPR is used as parameter name for what is, I
> guess an Rx construct (the language used in `Rx Construct').  Expression
> or construct?  Make it clear that RX-EXPR is an RX construct, if that's
> what it is.  And consider adding an xref to `Rx Construct'.
>
> 5. `Rx Functions': A couple places talk about `'regexp' forms', but
> those are specified nowhere, AFAICT.  The same places talk about
> 'literal' forms, which are specified, but which don't seem to work (?).
> (See bug #46909.)

Mattias, is this perhaps something you could take a look at?  I guess
it's about (info "(elisp) Rx Notation").