bug#14484: 24.3.50; doc of `after-find-file'

bug#14484: 24.3.50; doc of `after-find-file'

[Drew Adams]

1. The parameter is named _AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER, not
AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER.

2. This makes no sense:
"(see `revert-buffer-in-progress-p' for similar functionality)."

Similar functionality to what?  The parameter is _ignored_!

Seems like this doc string got incompletely updated when the function
got modified to ignore this parameter.  Just a guess - incomprehensible
as it stands.

3. And since _AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER is ignored, why
does `recover-file' continue to make a point of using it?  Why doesn't
it just use `(after-find-file)'?  Again, it seems like someone made an
incomplete change to the code, neglecting to clean up here and there.

In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-05-24 on LEG570
Bzr revision: 112715 yamaoka@jpl.org-20130524143612-v96chr0e5istvj82
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --prefix=/c/usr --enable-checking CFLAGS='-O0 -g3'
 CPPFLAGS='-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1 -I/c/usr/include''

bug#14484: 24.3.50; doc of `after-find-file'

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> 1. The parameter is named _AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER, not
> AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER.

This is how `C-h f' on that starts:

after-find-file is a compiled Lisp function in ‘files.el’.

(after-find-file &optional ERROR WARN NOAUTO
AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER NOMODES)

So it's consistent, even if the arg is "really" _'d.

> 2. This makes no sense:
> "(see `revert-buffer-in-progress-p' for similar functionality)."
>
> Similar functionality to what?  The parameter is _ignored_!

I think it means "if this is what you used to use, use this similar
thing instead".  Seems clear to me.

> 3. And since _AFTER-FIND-FILE-FROM-REVERT-BUFFER is ignored, why
> does `recover-file' continue to make a point of using it?  Why doesn't
> it just use `(after-find-file)'?  Again, it seems like someone made an
> incomplete change to the code, neglecting to clean up here and there.

It calls

(after-find-file nil nil t)

so if it did, it's been fixed.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no