Subject: bug#14797: 24.3.50; new, undocumented menu structure using VECTORS?

From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 09:15:07 -0700 (PDT)

> > +@item @var{vector}
> > +This kind of element is similar to a char-table: element @var{n} is
> > +the binding for the character with code @var{n}.  Since the range of
> > +characters that can be bound this way is limited by the vector size,
> > +and vector creation allocates space for all character codes from 0 up,
> > +this format should not be used except for creating menu keymaps
> > +(@pxref{Menu Keymaps}), where the bindings themselves don't matter.
> > +
> >  @item @var{string}
> >  @cindex keymap prompt string
> >  @cindex overall prompt string
> 
> LGTM, except that "the character with code N" could use some better
> wording.  How about
>   ... element whose index is @var{c} is the binding for the character
>   @var{c}.
> instead?

Both look OK to me.  And adding such doc is a definite
improvement.

It's not very clear to me from this doc what the relation
is between a key binding and a "binding for the character".
Keys and characters are different animals.  Clearly there
is a relation between them here, but it doesn't seem to
be made explicit.

But again, unless you want to try to clarify that, the
proposed doc is OK, and adding it improves things.