Re: master b02c9bc: Improve documentation of new Xref options

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 18:21:24 +0300
> 
> >   @findex project-search
> > -  @kbd{M-x project-search} is an interactive variant of
> > +  @kbd{M-x project-search} is an incremental variant of
> 
> Is it really incremental? Maybe call it "iterative".

Is "sequential" better?  "Iterative" sounds too "mathematical".

> Compared to isearch (which is "incremental search"), we are not allowed 
> to change the search string on-the-fly, for example.

Well, I meant incremental in the sense that we do it one match at a
time.

> > -@c Sadly, the new-and-improved Xref feature doesn't provide anything
> > -@c close to the described below features of the now-obsoleted
> > -@c tags-apropos.  I'm leaving this here to encourage enhancements to
> > -@c xref.el.
> > +@c Sadly, the new-and-improved Xref feature doesn't provide some
> > +@c of the features of the now-obsoleted tags-apropos.  I'm leaving
> > +@c this here to encourage enhancements to xref.el.
> 
> Is that about the display of tag file names in the apropos output buffer?

No, it's about the features listed after the shown hunk.  I just made
its language less extreme, because xref-find-apropos does exist.

> >   The new user option 'xref-auto-jump-to-first-definition' controls the
> > -behavior of 'xref-find-definitions' and related commands: if it's t or
> > -'show', the first match is automatically displayed; if it's 'move',
> > -point in the "*xref*" buffer is automatically moved to the first match
> > -without displaying it.
> > -The new user option 'xref-auto-jump-to-first-xref' changes the behavior of
> > -all Xref commands in the same way as 'xref-auto-jump-to-first-definition'
> > -affects the "find-definitions" commands.
> > +behavior of 'xref-find-definitions' and related commands, like
> 
> Maybe "similar" rather than related? The point is that those commands 
> use the same UI (to show, sometimes, very different information), rather 
> than that are united by subject matter.

I went with "variants", okay?