Re: Add some aliases for re-related functions

[Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>]

On 04.05.2020 20:46, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc:rms@gnu.org,emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> From: Dmitry Gutov<dgutov@yandex.ru>
>> Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 20:42:03 +0300
>>
>> On 04.05.2020 20:35, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>> Cc:emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>>> From: Dmitry Gutov<dgutov@yandex.ru>
>>>> Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 20:12:40 +0300
>>>>
>>>> On 04.05.2020 17:28, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>>> I think it would be better to do it the other way around: make "C-h f"
>>>>> look at the arguments and the first line of the doc string (and
>>>>> similarly with "C-h v")
>>>> Unusual behavior aside, I don't think our general completion logic will
>>>> work well when input has little correlation to the completion results
>>>> (function names).
>>> I don't understand the response: what I wrote had no relation to
>>> completion whatsoever.  Maybe you responded to the wrong message?
>> Not at all.
>>
>> 'C-h f' uses completing-read to help the user input the function they'll
>> see the description for.
> Yes, but that's entirely unrelated to Richard's question and to my
> response.  They had to do with what these command search, not how they
> invoke completion of their arguments.
> 
> Hmm... I think I see the confusion: I said "C-h f", but had "C-h a" in
> mind.  Sorry.

Hm. You also said "and also C-h v". Which works very much like "C-h f".

But for "C-h a" that can make sense, of course.