[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#42323: 26.3; Doc string of `seq-map'
From: |
Michael Heerdegen |
Subject: |
bug#42323: 26.3; Doc string of `seq-map' |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Dec 2020 17:11:32 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> It is, indeed, pretty obscure. Like Drew, I wonder -- do we really
> have to put these implementation details in the doc string at all?
> Opinions?
[ Such things were often knitted with hot needle by Stefan, left for us
as "an exercise", to formulate positive ]
Details: yes, it's good to have a list of implementations. Obscure:
No. The generated doc of implementations is indeed rather obscure.
Needs a good heart to fix:
> Implementations:
>
> #'(sequence sequence) in ‘seq.el’.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What syntax is that actually? An accident?
> Undocumented
I would remove "Undocumented", it makes the text rather unreadable when
repeated often.
> #'sequence in ‘seq.el’.
>
> Undocumented
I wonder to what that is actually referring to. There is only one
implementation in seq.el...?
Regards,
Michael.