GNU bug report logs - #11342
24.1.50; HOOK variable name in `add-hook' etc. confusing

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de
Subject: bug#11342: closed (Re: bug#11342: 24.1.50; HOOK variable name in
 `add-hook' etc. confusing)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 14:48:03 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your bug report

#11342: 24.1.50; HOOK variable name in `add-hook' etc. confusing

which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 11342 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
11342: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=11342
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de
Cc: 11342-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#11342: 24.1.50;
	HOOK variable name in `add-hook' etc. confusing
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 10:46:54 -0400

>   remove-hook: (HOOK FUNCTION &optional LOCAL)
> You could misinterpret that and think that the first argument must be
> a value representing a hook.  But actually it must be a _symbol_
> holding a hook.

Actually, the docstring says "HOOK should be a symbol", so the problem
is only that you base your decision on the eldoc info, which is
necessarily too limited to be trusted to give that kind of detail.

I find that changing the argument name makes the code and docstring too
verbose for my taste, so I don't think it's worth the trouble.


        Stefan

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.1.50; HOOK variable name in `add-hook' etc. confusing
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:45:26 +0200

Hi,

this is just a tiny detail, but confusing for newbies:

Turn on eldoc mode in any elisp buffer.  If you move point into an
`add-hook' or `remove-hook' form, you get e.g. the message

  remove-hook: (HOOK FUNCTION &optional LOCAL)

You could misinterpret that and think that the first argument must be
a value representing a hook.  But actually it must be a _symbol_
holding a hook.

So, I want to make the suggestion to replace the variable `hook' in
the definition of `remove-hook' by `hook-var', and to do the same for
`add-hook' and `run-hooks'.  Then, the eldoc message would be

  remove-hook: (HOOK-VAR FUNCTION &optional LOCAL)

which is more clear.


Thanks,

Michael.


In GNU Emacs 24.1.50.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.4.1)
 of 2012-04-23 on zelenka, modified by Debian
 (emacs-snapshot package, version 2:20120423-1)
Windowing system distributor `The X.Org Foundation', version 11.0.11104000
Configured using:
 `configure '--build' 'i486-linux-gnu' '--host' 'i486-linux-gnu'
 '--prefix=/usr' '--sharedstatedir=/var/lib' '--libexecdir=/usr/lib'
 '--localstatedir=/var' '--infodir=/usr/share/info'
 '--mandir=/usr/share/man' '--with-pop=yes'
 '--enable-locallisppath=/etc/emacs-snapshot:/etc/emacs:/usr/local/share/emacs/24.1.50/site-lisp:/usr/local/share/emacs/site-lisp:/usr/share/emacs/24.1.50/site-lisp:/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp'
 '--without-compress-info' '--with-crt-dir=/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/'
 '--with-x=yes' '--with-x-toolkit=gtk3' '--with-imagemagick=yes'
 'build_alias=i486-linux-gnu' 'host_alias=i486-linux-gnu'
 'CFLAGS=-DDEBIAN -DSITELOAD_PURESIZE_EXTRA=5000 -g -O2''

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.