bug#14577: 24.3.50; doc string of `interactive' is wrong

[Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>]

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

> The doc string confuses wrt its optional argument.  Please refer to
> (elisp) `Using Interactive' for a proper description, the essentials of
> which can be used to fix the doc string.
>
> 1. There is one optional argument, which should not be called ARGS, as
> that confuses things.  If there is an argument for `interactive' then
> there is only one.  The optional argument to `interactive' provides the
> arguments to the command.  The Elisp manual calls the `interactive'
> argument ARG-DESCRIPTOR, which is OK.
>
> 2. "To get several arguments" - Again, such language is
> misleading/confusing.  The doc string tries to use "argument" in more
> than one sense, without distinguishing or defining them.  IOW, if you
> want to speak about the arguments that get passed to the command (not to
> `interactive'), then be careful about the wording.
>
> 3. "it is evaluated to get a list of arguments to pass to the function".
> Say "command", not "function", here, to avoid confusion with the
> argument to `interactive'.  Better is to avoid such language altogether.

I've now tweaked this on the trunk.

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