From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22314: 25.1.50; Document variable `deactivate-mark' in Elisp manual Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2016 08:49:05 +0200 Message-ID: <83wprjnt7i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <<<<88046cae-d0e4-4108-b655-5ed142ea97f7@default>>>> <<<<83fuyb50jl.fsf@gnu.org>>>> <<>> <<<2d847088-3f43-4771-9178-4c51081da5d5@default>>> <<<83oacwpcrn.fsf@gnu.org>>> <> <<8337u7q46w.fsf@gnu.org>> <392e6417-fc8f-46a9-85b2-39d22a90f90e@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1452322221 12728 80.91.229.3 (9 Jan 2016 06:50:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 06:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22314-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 09 07:50:10 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLl-0006qa-Kf for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 07:50:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39302 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLl-0005nr-06 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:50:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47220) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLh-0005mV-Cu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:50:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLe-0002ko-5A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:50:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55354) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLe-0002kd-2B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:50:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnLd-0003Wf-UG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:50:01 -0500 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2016 06:50:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 22314 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 22314@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com Original-Received: via spool by 22314-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D22314.145232216913505 (code D ref 22314); Sat, 09 Jan 2016 06:50:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22314-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2016 06:49:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43573 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnL7-0003Vl-E1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:49:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56051) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnL5-0003VY-V0 for 22314-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:49:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnKx-0002eC-E6 for 22314-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:49:22 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:52132) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnKx-0002e8-Aj; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:49:19 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1902 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aHnKj-0004qG-Jr; Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:49:18 -0500 In-reply-to: <392e6417-fc8f-46a9-85b2-39d22a90f90e@default> (message from Drew Adams on Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:29:42 -0800 (PST)) 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:111406 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:29:42 -0800 (PST) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: 22314@debbugs.gnu.org > > > I see the same, but I don't understand why that is a problem. The > > function and the variable are described one after the other, and 'i' > > puts you on the first of them with the second clearly visible below. > > How is that a problem? And how is it worse than having 2 identical > > index entries instead, which point each one to a place several lines > > apart? > > It's wrong because it does not move point to the entry. Nothing > indicates to a user that there in fact 3 entries, not 2. The user's eyes should indicate that. You are splitting hair. > I would not have filed this bug report if I thought that this > was not a problem. And as you can see from my initial report, > I in fact mistakenly thought that the variable was not even > documented, because cycling among the index entries did not > take me to it. You should have read a bit more than a single line. > I don't see why you wouldn't want to add an index entry for this > variable. But if you don't feel like it then what can I say? THERE IS ALREADY AN INDEX ENTRY FOR IT!!!! How many times do I need to tell you that? Just look at the sources! > If the Elisp manual had different indexes, as does the Emacs > manual, then adding it would also let a user find it in the > Variables Index. The function is indexed as a function, the variable is indexed as a variable. We have @defvar for the variable, which indexes the variable, and a @defun for the function, which indexes the function. > Maybe it's not possible to index both, if there is only one > Index? Dunno. If you can't, you can't. If you can (maybe two > entries, with suffixes "(variable)" and "(function)"), that's > better, IMO. Bug closed.