From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24353: 25.1.1: looking-back wrong info Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <> <<83lgzael08.fsf@gnu.org>> <> <<83k2euehyc.fsf@gnu.org>> <> <<83eg52dszc.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1472846725 9087 195.159.176.226 (2 Sep 2016 20:05:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 20:05:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 24353@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 02 22:05:21 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1bfuiB-0001OZ-MP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 22:05:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43717 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfui9-0006CH-Bz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:05:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40598) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfui4-0006B1-2K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:05:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfuhy-0004VL-WF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:05:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:50278) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfuhy-0004VH-SH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bfuhy-0004LJ-Ia for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:05:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 20:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24353 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix notabug Original-Received: via spool by 24353-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24353.147284664716623 (code B ref 24353); Fri, 02 Sep 2016 20:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24353) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Sep 2016 20:04:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47990 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bfuh5-0004K3-0F for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:04:07 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:42661) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bfuh3-0004JY-EI for 24353@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:04:05 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u82K3vr7023288 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Sep 2016 20:03:58 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u82K3umc004742 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Sep 2016 20:03:56 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0014.oracle.com (abhmp0014.oracle.com [141.146.116.20]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u82K3tdJ011769; Fri, 2 Sep 2016 20:03:56 GMT In-Reply-To: <<83eg52dszc.fsf@gnu.org>> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6753.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:122866 Archived-At: > > This is not a command, for users. It is a function used by > > Emacs-Lisp programmers. Sounds like `C-h f' is becoming less > > useful, and programmers now need to bypass it and go directly > > to the source code, just to find out the correct signature. >=20 > The signature is correct, it just advertises LIMIT as a mandatory > argument. We could actually make it mandatory, but that would be a > backward-incompatible change, so a lesser evil has been chosen. >=20 > advertised-calling-convention is used in only 28 places in all of > Emacs, i.e. it's definitely an extraordinary measure. So saying that > "C-h f" becomes less useful cannot even be called an exaggeration. I know what advertised-calling-convention is. The argument is not mandatory. So the documented signature is NOT correct. A programmer looking only at the `C-h f' output is misled. It is perfectly possible to invoke `(looking-back "abc")'. I see nothing good coming from this change. Again, if you are so worried about recommending that programmers not invoke the function without a LIMIT argument, then say so explicitly in the doc string. Do not fake the signature to substitute for what is a recommendation. Making the recommendation explicit makes it both clearer and stronger. You do not mislead about what the actual signature is, and you emphasize - call attention to - the recommended practice of using LIMIT.