Re: new *Help* argument highlighting

[Juanma Barranquero <jmbarranquero@wke.es>]

On 07 May 2004 14:32:46 +0900
Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp> wrote:

> I've just seen the effect of the argument highlighting in
> describe-function *Help* buffers, and it seems like _way_ too much.
> It's nice to have some highlighting for the args, but I think
> `font-lock-variable-name-face' is the wrong thing to use.

Not only I fully agree with you, but one or two days ago I changed it to
use (:face '(:weight bold)), which seems much more sensible as a default...
:)  The font-lock-variable-name-face was just a test version.

> I ended up thinking `the arguments are _already_ in uppercase, which is
> pretty noticeable, why is necessary to highlight them further at all?'

There are several reasons:

 - Many docstrings have other uppercase words (for example, most def*
   functions, like defface, define-minor-mode, defcustom...), so the
   highlighting helps to distinguish which ones are really function
   arguments.

 - It makes easier to look for an argument when the docstring is long.

 - The feature can be used to highlight just *one* (or a set of)
   argument. That could help in places where we're asking for input for
   an argument and want to show the entire docstring, but highlight the
   item we're requesting (that's the original motivation).

Help argument highlighting has proved already very useful to find
docstrings with typos in argument names, or which use a different name
in the arglist and the docstring.

My (admitedly *very* biased opinion :) is that some people finds the
feature useful, so I suggest that, instead of removing it, thoso who
don't like it set the face to default.

                                                                Juanma