From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about intended behavior of 'insert-for-yank-1'. Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:32:58 +0300 Message-ID: <83y42x7yud.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874m5lr92d.fsf@red-bean.com> <83eg4p9hqk.fsf@gnu.org> <87inu1ghud.fsf@red-bean.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1473705251 1082 195.159.176.226 (12 Sep 2016 18:34:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 18:34:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 12 20:34:07 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1bjW3G-0006wI-Bg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:33:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44564 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjW3E-0004Vz-Cr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:33:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjW2d-0004Vi-OF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:33:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjW2Z-0000BT-Fc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:33:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:41301) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjW2Z-0000BN-Cd; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:33:11 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1981 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bjW2W-00030r-Gk; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:33:11 -0400 In-reply-to: <87inu1ghud.fsf@red-bean.com> (message from Karl Fogel on Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:15:22 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:207394 Archived-At: > From: Karl Fogel > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:15:22 -0500 > > Thanks, Eli. Yes, that's true, but note that the doc string for `insert-for-yank' just refers the reader to `insert-for-yank-1' for details. The only doc string where the STRING-passing behavior is discussed is the doc string of `insert-for-yank-1', and that doc string indicates, or strongly implies, that the entirety of STRING is passed (which it isn't). Ah, so this is about the doc string of insert-for-yank, not its subroutine. > Are you saying that in your view there is no documentation deficiency here? I agree that the doc string of insert-for-yank should describe what it does. What it says now hardly qualifies as documentation, and referring to an internal subroutine for that is, shall we say, suboptimal ;-) Feel free to improve the doc string of insert-for-yank. Thanks.