bug#17871: 24.4.50; (elisp) `Core Advising Primitives': interactive spec as function?

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

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

> And yes, that updated doc about interactive specs should then
> cross-reference the doc about using a functional interactive spec for
> advising - and vice versa.

Dunno if that would be good.  Although we can with nadvice use
the same syntax for defining pieces of advice as for defining functions,
advices have a different meaning (semantic).  The interactive
specs of advices are not exactly interactive specs in the common sense -
although they look similar, they are related, but different features.

I think a short example would be good.  Also, the term "function" is a
bit unclear here, maybe we should add "a lambda expression or fbound
symbol" or so, to make clear that we don't mean a sexp that returns a
function.

Michael.