From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6576: documentation `string-to-char' is incorrect Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:19 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83630r934x.fsf@gnu.org> <834ogb8txc.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6dn74lv.fsf@gnu.org> <83wrt770rf.fsf@gnu.org> <83pqldef1r.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1310650551 23348 80.91.229.12 (14 Jul 2011 13:35:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monkey@sandpframing.com, schwab@linux-m68k.org, 6576@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 14 15:35:43 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4s-0002Mu-TY for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:35:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34101 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4s-0000MA-2H for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43670) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4N-0000Go-EJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4I-0004jr-4i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:52308) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4H-0004iM-D2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM4G-0001Iq-GF; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:04 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:35:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6576 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6576-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6576.13106504694952 (code B ref 6576); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:35:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6576) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Jul 2011 13:34:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM3g-0001Hp-Gu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:28 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM3d-0001Ha-SV for 6576@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QhM3X-0002UK-KF; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:34:19 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen on Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:00:17 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:35:04 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:48988 Archived-At: > From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen > Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org, monkey@sandpframing.com, 6576@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:00:17 +0200 > > > Which other functions would need this? > > `char-after', `aref' on a string, `following-char'... Basically > anything that returns a character. > > >> Is there a specific reason this particular function deserves this > >> detailed explanation? > > > > If you can suggest a better one that takes care of the original bug > > report, please show your suggestion. > > I think "close, notabug" would have taken care of the bug report. :-) The original problem which triggered the report was this part, and this part only: A multibyte character is handled correctly. To make a decent job for this bug, we need, as a minimum, to do something with this unparsable sentence. I admit that my suggestion went well beyond that, but if we want to take a step back, please suggest what to say instead. I hope you agree that this sentence cannot be left as-is. (To know what is meant by this sentence, look at the source of the function.)