>> -@defun derived-mode-p &rest modes
>> +@defun derived-mode-p modes
>>  This function returns non-@code{nil} if the current major mode is
>>  derived from any of the major modes given by the symbols @var{modes}.
>> +Instead of a list, @var{modes} can also be a single symbol.
>
> If MODES is supposed to be a list, then why does the first sentence
> say "given by the symbols MODES"?

Oh, right, in the current text, the `&rest modes` makes it clear that
`modes` is a list, whereas with my change we need to spell it out
more clearly.

> And the last sentence would be a tad less confusing if it said
>
>   Instead of a list, @var{modes} can also be a single mode symbol.

Done.

>> -(defun provided-mode-derived-p (mode &rest modes)
>> +(defun provided-mode-derived-p (mode &optional modes &rest old-modes)
>>    "Non-nil if MODE is derived from one of MODES.
>
> This should IMO say
>
>   Non-nil if MODE is derived from a mode that is a member of the list MODES.

Changed (tho it now goes over the 72 columns 🙁).

>> +(defun derived-mode-p (&optional modes &rest old-modes)
>> + "Non-nil if the current major mode is derived from one of MODES.
> Likewise here.

I'm having trouble making this change fit into the 80 columns limit, so
I left this first line unchanged and reworked the second line to clarify
that MODES should be a list of symbols.


        Stefan