GNU bug report logs - #14577
24.3.50; doc string of `interactive' is wrong

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 14577 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 14577 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.3.50; doc string of `interactive' is wrong
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 08:48:59 -0700 (PDT)

The doc string confuses wrt its optional argument.  Please refer to
(elisp) `Using Interactive' for a proper description, the essentials of
which can be used to fix the doc string.

1. There is one optional argument, which should not be called ARGS, as
that confuses things.  If there is an argument for `interactive' then
there is only one.  The optional argument to `interactive' provides the
arguments to the command.  The Elisp manual calls the `interactive'
argument ARG-DESCRIPTOR, which is OK.

2. "To get several arguments" - Again, such language is
misleading/confusing.  The doc string tries to use "argument" in more
than one sense, without distinguishing or defining them.  IOW, if you
want to speak about the arguments that get passed to the command (not to
`interactive'), then be careful about the wording.

3. "it is evaluated to get a list of arguments to pass to the function".
Say "command", not "function", here, to avoid confusion with the
argument to `interactive'.  Better is to avoid such language altogether.


In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i386-mingw-nt6.1.7601)
 of 2013-06-01 on ODIEONE
Bzr revision: 112809 xfq.free <at> gmail.com-20130601123514-of64qkop6z48i3ko
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --with-gcc (4.7) --no-opt --enable-checking --cflags
 -IC:/Devel/emacs/build/include --ldflags -LC:/Devel/emacs/build/lib'

Message #10 received at 14577 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 14577 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 13571 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14577: 24.3.50; doc string of `interactive' is wrong
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:18:05 +0200

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> The doc string confuses wrt its optional argument.  Please refer to
> (elisp) `Using Interactive' for a proper description, the essentials of
> which can be used to fix the doc string.
>
> 1. There is one optional argument, which should not be called ARGS, as
> that confuses things.  If there is an argument for `interactive' then
> there is only one.  The optional argument to `interactive' provides the
> arguments to the command.  The Elisp manual calls the `interactive'
> argument ARG-DESCRIPTOR, which is OK.
>
> 2. "To get several arguments" - Again, such language is
> misleading/confusing.  The doc string tries to use "argument" in more
> than one sense, without distinguishing or defining them.  IOW, if you
> want to speak about the arguments that get passed to the command (not to
> `interactive'), then be careful about the wording.
>
> 3. "it is evaluated to get a list of arguments to pass to the function".
> Say "command", not "function", here, to avoid confusion with the
> argument to `interactive'.  Better is to avoid such language altogether.

I've now tweaked this on the trunk.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Previous Next

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