From: MON KEY <monkey@sandpframing.com>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
Cc: 3740@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
Subject: bug#3740: documentation of args to `documentation-property' differ info<-->docstring on 23.0.92.1 thru 23.0.95
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 19:42:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d2afcfda0907031642r5361b5aekac93dc7164ac6ee1@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A4DA956.30902@gmx.at>
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 2:46 AM, martin rudalics<rudalics@gmx.at> wrote:
> The current Elisp reference manual features more than 500 such
> {...}
> recompile, rebuild. Doing this manually would get people busy for quite
> some time.
Sure, but this particular case is significant in a way that other +/-
499 might not be;
`documentation-property' relates to the documentation of documentation.
Me: "How shall I get at a symbol's documentation?"
Me to myself: "RTFM!"
Me: "Manual doesn't agree with source..."
Me to myself: "Hrmmm... well, FTFM!"
Getting to discrepancies like this one is _kinda_ important.
Again, in this _particular_ situation this is not simply a discrepancy
but a fundamental inconsistency w/re to Emacs.
I understand that this particular situation may pose a bootstrapping
issue. However, if that is the case then it certainly doesn't hold
that the 'discrepancy' is of "no importance".
What exactly does it say that the one true self documenting editor
can't/won't correctly self document the very documentation of how it
self documents?
Actually - on second thought - disregard the previous rhetorical
question its not of any importance...
> martin
s_P
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-03 23:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-02 18:24 bug#3740: documentation of args to `documentation-property' differ info<-->docstring on 23.0.92.1 thru 23.0.95 MON KEY
2009-07-03 2:40 ` Glenn Morris
2009-07-03 4:35 ` MON KEY
2009-07-03 6:46 ` martin rudalics
2009-07-03 23:42 ` MON KEY [this message]
2009-07-04 23:16 ` Glenn Morris
2009-07-04 23:20 ` Processed: " Emacs bug Tracking System
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d2afcfda0907031642r5361b5aekac93dc7164ac6ee1@mail.gmail.com \
--to=monkey@sandpframing.com \
--cc=3740@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com \
--cc=rudalics@gmx.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).