GNU bug report logs - #38886
(read-variable) documentation doesn't match behavior

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Douglas Lewan <d.lewan2000 <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 38886 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#38886: (read-variable) documentation doesn't match behavior
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 16:56:36 +0200

Douglas Lewan <d.lewan2000 <at> gmail.com> writes:

> According to the documentation for (read-variable), this sexp
> (read-variable "?" '(all one top)) should return all if there's no
> input. It, however, signals an error instead: Wrong type argument:
> stringp, all. Indeed, this sexp (read-variable "?" '("all" "one"
> "top")) does return the symbol all
>
> I'm guessing that that is in fact the intended behavior. (In the C
> code that seems to be the case.) However, the documentation is
> ambiguous. The first paragraph of the documentation would better end
> "... if it is a list of strings."

Yup.  I've now fixed the doc string in the way you suggest in Emacs 28.

-- 
(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.