Re: Auto Fill Comments

[Arthur Miller]

Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> writes:

>> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 at 9:51 AM
>> From: "Arthur Miller" <arthur.miller@live.com>
>> To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
>> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Auto Fill Comments
>>
>> Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> writes:
>>
>> >> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 at 8:28 AM
>> >> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
>> >> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> >> Subject: Re: Auto Fill Comments
>> >>
>> >> > From: Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>
>> >> > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 01:47:08 +0100
>> >> > Sensitivity: Normal
>> >> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> >> >
>> >> > The manuals should be rewritten because they are incomprehensible.
>> >> > Perhaps it was good in the eighties.  It continues forever.  Consider
>> >> > "face customisation" for instance, which just means font.  Nobody
>> >> > fuckin reads a manual with 17 nodes.  You don't know which one to use,
>> >> > which commands are most useful, and so on.  The problem gets compounded
>> >> > because every esoteric command is there.
>> >> >
>> >> > You are just insisting on something bad and inefficient.
>> >>
>> >> Fair warning: if that is your attitude towards our documentation,
>> >> please be aware that there will be some people here who'd refrain from
>> >> helping you.  We don't work for you, so if you refuse to help yourself
>> >> by becoming more proficient with the extensive documentation features
>> >> in Emacs, we cannot be expected to hold your hand forever.
>> >
>> > It is well known that some at Gnu cannot take criticisms when others
>> > try to read what others write.  I am a writer by profession.  So spare
>> > me the "Don't work for you" defensive approach.
>> I already hinted you that you could hire a professional writer to clean
>> the swamp for you. Why do you think I told you that? :D
>>
>> Nobody here works for you. Not Eli, nor everybody else.
>>
>> Believe me, Emacs documentation is not the problem. You maybe are
>> writer, but you are certainly not a programmer; otherwise you wouldn't
>> ask how to start a Java application :-). We all have strengths and
>> weaknesses; your strength is obviously not programming. Nothing shame in
>> that, not everybody has to be a programmer.
>
> The programming craft is in the source code.  The documentation is to help
> understand it.  Could be even harder than writing the code.  It makes a
> convenient listing if you know what you're doing.  It's not always the failure
> of readers.
Of course it is not always the failure of readers, I did not say it
either.