From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: emacs-25 f708cb2: Clarify doc string of 'transpose-sexps' Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 12:36:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <<20161104095223.23249.72530@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>> <<20161104095223.631AB22012D@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>> <<8737j7e3r5.fsf@gmx.net>> <> <<87y40zckn9.fsf@gmx.net>> <<977b7eaa-1c5f-4d8b-be5d-33ec73f5a962@default>> <<87twbncgve.fsf@gmx.net>> <<3687e9ab-658b-49b9-b766-8658d5c48374@default>> <<87pombceyc.fsf@gmx.net>> <<83cd67b5-cb42-4fea-b6be-21e9ec8075a7@default>> <<83oa1vjdrx.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1478288309 17948 195.159.176.226 (4 Nov 2016 19:38:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 19:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen.berman@gmx.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 04 20:38:26 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c2kJQ-0001ZP-VL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 20:38:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40506 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c2kJT-0004c2-SN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 15:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52465) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c2kI7-00046k-1H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 15:36:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c2kI6-0000iD-6Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 15:36:43 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:17353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c2kI2-0000bd-Eb; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 15:36:38 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id uA4JaYh3002040 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 19:36:34 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id uA4JaYZH025012 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 19:36:34 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0019.oracle.com (abhmp0019.oracle.com [141.146.116.25]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uA4JaYa5021777; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 19:36:34 GMT In-Reply-To: <<83oa1vjdrx.fsf@gnu.org>> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 12.0.6753.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:209169 Archived-At: > > It is really not great to tell someone they "cannot" or > > "must not" etc. do something without raising an error that > > really enforces "cannot" etc. >=20 > If someone comes up with a way to lift that restriction, we could > remove this text from the doc string. but as long as the command > works as it does, I think we should document that, or else we will > have bug reports about its not meeting expectations. I did not suggest removing the text from the doc string. The point is that it is better if the code backs up what the doc says, by raising an error if you try to do what it says you cannot do. If `C-b' at bob did not raise an error, but instead just moved point to the end of line 42, it would be scant help to tell users in the doc of `C-b' that you cannot use it at bob.