From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#32629: 26; `buffer-list-update-hook' doc string Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:18:50 +0300 Message-ID: <83pnxlo2ph.fsf@gnu.org> References: <> <<83y3c9o59k.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1536589614 3969 195.159.176.226 (10 Sep 2018 14:26:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:26:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 32629@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 10 16:26:49 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1fzN9I-0000rY-Vu for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 16:26:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51946 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzNBP-0007LT-Dl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:28:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38936) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN86-00045U-2X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:25:34 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1q-0003QL-M5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:19:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:47479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1q-0003QF-ID for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1q-0002DK-EQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:19:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32629 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 32629-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32629.15365891348497 (code B ref 32629); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 32629) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Sep 2018 14:18:54 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52497 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1i-0002Cy-1V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:18:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44912) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1g-0002Cm-Nd for 32629@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:18:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1X-0003Ec-Hm for 32629@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:18:47 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:40571) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1X-0003EU-Cx; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:18:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4461 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fzN1X-0006jw-0g; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:18:43 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Drew Adams on Mon, 10 Sep 2018 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:150191 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 06:51:31 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: 32629@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > The doc string should not list the functions that run the hook. > > > > Why not? > > Same reason we don't do that elsewhere (do we?). I see no reason for such a stringent consistency. > Instead we say, in the doc for each such function, that it runs the > hook. We don't say that for every hook, only for some, and mostly for hooks that are called only from a single function. > (Similarly, we don't list, in the doc for some function, all of the > functions that might call it.) Of course not. But in this case doing that makes sense. > Let me ask: Why should this doc list the functions that run the > hook? Because it tells one indirectly what changes are considered to "update the buffer list". > And do you know of other places where we do that? I don't think this question is relevant. We need to consider each case separately.