GNU bug report logs - #44503
27.1; image-scroll-up and image-scroll-down

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: "Roland Winkler" <winkler <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 44503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Subject: bug#44503: 27.1; image-scroll-up and image-scroll-down
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +0200

"Roland Winkler" <winkler <at> gnu.org> writes:

> I am sorry, I haven't had as much progress as I had wanted to.  I
> realized that the discrepancy between documented behavior and actual
> code exists in a larger number of commands than I had expected.  So
> the question becomes: for how many commands do we want to include a
> remark in the docstring saying that due to historical reasons they
> call prefix-numeric-value not in their interactive specs, but
> scroll_command calls prefix_numeric_value in its body, which defines
> how these commands interpret the argument.  (The actual wording in the
> docstrings should probably be different.)
>
> I guess for the built-in functions scroll-up and scroll-down as well
> as image-scroll-up and image-scroll-down it is most important to
> mention this and we could leave the docstrings of other commands
> untouched.  What do you think?

Well, the doc strings for these commands don't really describe
interactive usage at all, but I think most people would interpret what's
there as "it's like (interactive "p"), but with no prefix at all it
behaves differently".  (Which is what it does -- a full screen instead
of a line.)

Stating this explicitly in the doc strings of these four commands would
be nice.  So something like:

Interactively, giving this command a numerical prefix will scroll by
that many lines.  Without a prefix, scroll by a full screen.

-- 
(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.