From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `C-h v' may offer too many symbols Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:18 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87y64mkdu3.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1299817771 9877 80.91.229.12 (11 Mar 2011 04:29:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 04:29:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ted Zlatanov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 11 05:29:26 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pxtyf-0004wA-UG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 05:29:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46837 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pxtyf-0000eZ-8i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59161 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pxtyb-0000eU-19 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxtyZ-0005Ky-Vj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:20 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:62641 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxtyZ-0005Ku-T8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:19 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAGIzeU3O+IG+/2dsb2JhbACmNXjBBIViBIUpkBI X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.62,301,1297054800"; d="scan'208";a="95624824" Original-Received: from 206-248-129-190.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([206.248.129.190]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 10 Mar 2011 23:29:19 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id C556666135; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:29:18 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Fri, 11 Mar 2011 03:27:11 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.183 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:137078 Archived-At: > It makes sense, in a lexical world. However, currently you can do > (defconst :mykeyword :mykeyword) > and even if you add a docstring to that, I'm not sure it is sensible > to show it as a completion of describe-variable... Actually, if it has a docstring, it definitely makes sense. And if it doesn't, then it's not that much of a problem to include those rare cases in the completion. Stefan