Re: Auto Fill Comments

[Arthur Miller]

Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> writes:

>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2020 at 8:33 AM
>> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
>> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Auto Fill Comments
>>
>> > From: Arthur Miller <arthur.miller@live.com>
>> > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 22:26:13 +0100
>> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> >
>> > > Documentation, however, is to be structured according to different levels
>> > > of sophistication.  But I understand it could be a lot of work to 
>> > > complete.
>> > > Was not my intention to deride anyone. but to describe how it is.  
>> > > Documentation
>> > > is always better than no documentation.  And everyone does as one can.
>> >
>> > True. However, Emacs manuals are written by volunteers with limited
>> > resources in their spair time (I hack Emacs as a hobby when I drink
>> > coffee), so what is practical has also to be take into account. They
>> > have to prioritize what level they put themselves on, especially Elisp
>> > manual.
>>
>> That is true, but please point me to a Free Software project that has
>> better documentation than Emacs, let alone documentation better
>> structured according to different levels of sophistication.
I certainly can't. Emacs has definitely best docs nowadays; I can't say
nothing about levels of sphistication, since I am not well sophisticated
by my nature :-), but Emacs is definitely very well documented.

I use mostly C-h f so I can drop into docs, and if I don't understand
docs, I look at the source code; with Helpful package I am in C-code in
no time, usually. Helm is good for discovering; I can just type a letter
or few and see what it brings me for more exploration.