From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Albinus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Uncomprehensible DOC string Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 09:53:55 +0200 Message-ID: References: <86abj2wdry.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <874p98awa4.fsf@gmx.de> <85tzh8j79e.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1210319593 3079 80.91.229.12 (9 May 2008 07:53:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 07:53:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 09 09:53:47 2008 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 4.50) id 1JuNQJ-0005qS-DZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 09:53:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57200 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JuNPb-0003Dq-85 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:53:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JuNPX-0003DM-GG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:52:59 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JuNPW-0003D2-16 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:52:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40697 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JuNPV-0003Cz-Uv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:52:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:58166) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JuNPQ-0001Kr-1M; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:52:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mailrelay2.alcatel.de ([194.113.59.96]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JuNPI-0003k5-Eu; Fri, 09 May 2008 03:52:45 -0400 Original-Received: from slbhab.alcatel.de (slbhab.bln.sel.alcatel.de [149.204.63.218]) by mailrelay2.alcatel.de (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m497qa0p020421; Fri, 9 May 2008 09:52:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <85tzh8j79e.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 09 May 2008 08:55:57 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (hpux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 149.204.45.73 X-detected-kernel: by mx20.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 2) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:96862 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > That addresses the last partial sentence of my report. What about the > rest? There is no sense to leave a fragmentary explanation in the DOC > string when you need to read up the function's behavior elsewhere, > anyhow. The manual reference should be there to explain the _terms_ > used in the DOC string, but the DOC string should still be _complete_ > once the terms are clear. I'll try to be a little bit more comprehensive in the doc string. However, I don't believe that the doc string of `start-file-process' is the place to explain what are file name handlers at all. Best regards, Michael.