From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 10 12:18:55 2021 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2021 17:18:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51771 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lK2U3-0002tp-34 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:18:55 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:37306) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lK2U1-0002ti-Ec for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:18:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36458) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lK2U1-0001h7-2v for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:18:53 -0500 Received: from relay13.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.233]:59065) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lK2Ty-0004AN-Fj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:18:52 -0500 Received: from mail.gandi.net (m91-129-108-46.cust.tele2.ee [91.129.108.46]) (Authenticated sender: juri@linkov.net) by relay13.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA0B980011 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:18:46 +0000 (UTC) From: Juri Linkov To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: Interlink docstrings of =?utf-8?B?4oCYZGVsZXRl4oCZ?= and =?utf-8?B?4oCYcmVtb3Zl4oCZ?= Organization: LINKOV.NET Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:12:37 +0200 Message-ID: <875z1zqaky.fsf@mail.linkov.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.178.233; envelope-from=juri@linkov.net; helo=relay13.mail.gandi.net X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) The docstring of ‘delq’ links to ‘remq’: See also ‘remq’, which does not modify the argument. The docstring of ‘remq’ links back to ‘delq’: Contrary to ‘delq’, this does not use side-effects, and the argument LIST is not modified. Shouldn't docstrings of ‘delete’ and ‘remove’ do the same and refer each other? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 11 11:35:38 2021 Received: (at 47054) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Mar 2021 16:35:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54726 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lKOHi-00040k-5r for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 11:35:38 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:47962) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lKOHg-00040W-HU for 47054@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 11:35:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID :In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=iYpEPmF+pHqdu9moefwgnpRplT7AqEejHchgAf9yWLU=; b=E/c1ggUGpDI5TG3fJ27PVvLwYc 6vfFNbzSy2awyGDCNOnK3KMEQNrfKsrHAK8VdEowRTrhVvmhl2Ev2f/mbh9Z3wwBZB+Z4P83E3v3s XrT6l+nOHZhJghrNIJLaJoWbuBnpYmjRn73jqZRjJPNX+MynCQJJhY/CbiOU5W4aDXy8=; Received: from cm-84.212.220.105.getinternet.no ([84.212.220.105] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lKOHU-0002JB-NN; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:35:29 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Juri Linkov Subject: Re: bug#47054: Interlink docstrings of =?utf-8?B?4oCYZGVsZXRl4oCZ?= and =?utf-8?B?4oCYcmVtb3Zl4oCZ?= References: <875z1zqaky.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAD1BMVEVTKi2kKjm6QkzJ jJb///9f8wvTAAAAAWJLR0QEj2jZUQAAAAd0SU1FB+UDCxAXNCLtDhMAAAG6SURBVDjLbZTtucMg CIWJWUDMAgoLpLL/bveAkrb3aX6kxpePI0KJ8mFmoiY9v+t7vxKLjjeAIR3sgJua3m9LXm8+sD9V NmhuGg7MaiacoUQG76f5fv0Bps3xC1wdagcf/8EQKioqIcbBHJ6/iciFHOZ2FfIdyAIvM2QJAJUA 4kBEAeCyQ9cNPFKCIADi3v79ujyWLOSqZIPJ8JjbBUCncACpZOngyT+eWh6PbzBI12IBbq5pBGiS sQivtYdLqVQkXQDCfhe1fHjE4fKmP8A6Q/0GHioiPaC9QSwzxSN+n2NsjwJ9nMXaZ077EVqEv4Av MonsUEGO0JnVab7q4dEQp2YveXO2uWQxHY0/gdmQlp18JBBCKxs/J4HmBZDD7Lqz/1DUkaEA7uj9 U8o8ogG8iFwRyfpBp00qVnpL4FNhN3XBKCnZjeZYoAnmqHugG0o0hod32c2gSRGmyPTWWslxPDVP PUs3hdEcW5VOna7/Ll3d+7Wami+d5lN/evJOu62Q4zKZfuyze32ZnpK0aTHznYo3A0XDYKJaw34U xPCDP4E1OH4JuuoXobiuzHE7T10BtD8gpud52kjwB71NYRuukxQhAAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOmNyZWF0 ZQAyMDIxLTAzLTExVDE2OjIzOjUyKzAwOjAwwOL9bQAAACV0RVh0ZGF0ZTptb2RpZnkAMjAyMS0w My0xMVQxNjoyMzo1MiswMDowMLG/RdEAAAAASUVORK5CYII= X-Now-Playing: Depeche Mode's _Speak & Spell_: "Boys Say Go!" Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:35:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <875z1zqaky.fsf@mail.linkov.net> (Juri Linkov's message of "Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:12:37 +0200") Message-ID: <87h7lhir78.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Juri Linkov writes: > Shouldn't docstrings of ‘delete’ and ‘remove’ do the same > and refer each other? I think they should. In general, function docstrings mention related functions too little, I think. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 47054 Cc: 47054@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Juri Linkov writes: > Shouldn't docstrings of =E2=80=98delete=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98remove=E2= =80=99 do the same > and refer each other? I think they should. In general, function docstrings mention related functions too little, I think. --=20 (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 11 14:09:33 2021 Received: (at 47054) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Mar 2021 19:09:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54902 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lKQge-0007iT-Un for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 14:09:33 -0500 Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.231]:60145) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lKQgd-0007iB-2G; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 14:09:31 -0500 Received: from mail.gandi.net (m91-129-108-46.cust.tele2.ee [91.129.108.46]) (Authenticated sender: juri@linkov.net) by relay11.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E2FC100006; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 19:09:23 +0000 (UTC) From: Juri Linkov To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: Re: bug#47054: Interlink docstrings of =?utf-8?B?4oCYZGVsZXRl4oCZ?= and =?utf-8?B?4oCYcmVtb3Zl4oCZ?= Organization: LINKOV.NET References: <875z1zqaky.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87h7lhir78.fsf@gnus.org> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 21:08:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87h7lhir78.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:35:23 +0100") Message-ID: <87o8fpik3f.fsf@mail.linkov.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 47054 Cc: 47054@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) tags 47054 fixed close 47054 28.0.50 quit >> Shouldn't docstrings of ‘delete’ and ‘remove’ do the same >> and refer each other? > > I think they should. In general, function docstrings mention related > functions too little, I think. To not increase entropy, I copied the same text from delq/remq to delete/remove docstrings. From unknown Mon Aug 18 11:27:34 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 11:24:07 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator