GNU bug report logs - #16074
24.3.50; enhancement request: Remove "pop" from command names & doc for `C-(u|x) C-SPC'

Previous Next

Full log

Message #32 received at 16074 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>,
 16074 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#16074: 24.3.50; enhancement request: Remove "pop" from
 command names & doc for `C-(u|x) C-SPC'
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 15:03:07 -0700 (PDT)

> > The enhancement request is to fix this wrong
> > terminology wrt BOTH `global-mark-ring' and
> > `mark-ring'.
> 
> And `yank' doesn't yank, and `kill' doesn't kill literally.
> What is the most important is that docstrings should describe
> the behavior in all details.  The name is more a matter of taste.

Irrelevant.  Emacs _has_ "pop" in its terminology,
just like it has "yank" and "kill" (buffer, text).

This mistaken use of "pop" doesn't fit Emacs's use
of the word (or even typical outside uses of it).

And Emacs _has_ a term, "cycle", for the behavior
here.  "Cycle" is the term Emacs uses for rings.

And it's not just about the name.  It's also about
the doc, which incorrectly tells users that the
behavior is to "pop" the mark/position "off" the
ring.

That's wrong; it's not what happens.  That doesn't
"describe the behavior in all details".  Instead,
it describes a different behavior, which doesn't
happen.

Hand-waving alone can't justify this misleading.

On the other hand, as I replied to Eli, you can
decide whether fixing this is "worth the necessary
time, energy, VC resources and your whatnot."
That's up to you.

Previous Next

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