bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

[Drew Adams]

Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.

In GNU Emacs 26.3 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 of 2019-08-29
Repository revision: 96dd0196c28bc36779584e47fffcca433c9309cd
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 10.0.19045
Configured using:
 `configure --without-dbus --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
 --without-compress-install 'CFLAGS=-O2 -static -g3''

bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:43:17 +0000
> 
> Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.

How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
not allow" mean when the value is nil?

IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.

bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

[Drew Adams]

> > Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> > directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> > nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.
>
> How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
> not allow" mean when the value is nil?
> IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
> case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.

That you can't visit a directory is one thing.
That trying to do that raises an error is a
different thing.  Another possible behavior
that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
A third is to show a message, without raising
an error.

Not being able to do something is not the same
as having an error raised if you try to do it.

bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> CC: "63557@debbugs.gnu.org" <63557@debbugs.gnu.org>
> Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 15:35:03 +0000
> 
> > > Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> > > directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> > > nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.
> >
> > How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
> > not allow" mean when the value is nil?
> > IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
> > case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.
> 
> That you can't visit a directory is one thing.

The doc string says "allows", not "can".

> That trying to do that raises an error is a
> different thing.  Another possible behavior
> that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
> A third is to show a message, without raising
> an error.
> 
> Not being able to do something is not the same
> as having an error raised if you try to do it.

You are splitting hair for no good reason.

Closing.

bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

[Drew Adams]

> > That you can't visit a directory is one thing.
> 
> The doc string says "allows", not "can".

That you're not allowed to visit a directory is
one thing.  That an error is raised is another.

> > That trying to do that raises an error is a
> > different thing.  Another possible behavior
> > that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
> > A third is to show a message, without raising
> > an error.
> >
> > Not being able to do something is not the same
> > as having an error raised if you try to do it.
> 
> You are splitting hair for no good reason.

Tell that to the manual, which rightfully makes
clear that an error is raised.

Ask yourself if you're perhaps refusing a simple
doc fix for no good reason.