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: New behavior Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 20:01:50 +0300 Message-ID: <83zhwhgyv5.fsf@gnu.org> References: < <83zhwljmzf.fsf@gnu.org> <8F4ACB78-C9A4-4F85-8E69-CF4A1FE3D597@scratch.space> <83o9d0jlwd.fsf@gnu.org> > <<837ejlifmy.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1537117215 6603 195.159.176.226 (16 Sep 2018 17:00:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 17:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: van@scratch.space, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 16 19:00:11 2018 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 1g1aP4-0001cR-Np for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 19:00:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59710 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g1aRB-0003kn-Be for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:02:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55424) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g1aQm-0003aT-Tn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:01:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g1aQm-0002Uk-4W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:01:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:59836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g1aQm-0002UW-0m; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:01:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3590 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1g1aQl-0005Iu-K5; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:01:55 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Drew Adams on Sun, 16 Sep 2018 09:29:53 -0700 (PDT)) 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:229854 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 09:29:53 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > The Customize UI is for users who are not necessarily Lisp > > programmers, so the Value Menu should show the human-readable > > description of what each choice will do; it doesn't have to say > > anything about the Lisp value which stands for that choice. > > "Doesn't have to"? Sure. But it is generally more helpful for users > if the corresponding Lisp values are also cited in the doc string. I don't think I agreer, not in general. > That users should not, and generally do not, need to know Lisp > to customize a user option is not a reason that the doc for that > option should not mention the Lisp values. It's true that there > is no obligation for the doc to mention the Lisp values, but it > generally helps users to do so - so it typically _should_. There's also no catastrophe if users will read the source to find that out. Especially those who want to know and use Lisp.