Subject: bug#50599: [PATCH] Don't recommend against "\[...]" substitutions for performance

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 18:41:27 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:13:59 +0200
> Cc: [email-masked]
> 
> We change, in my patch, 'checkdoc-max-keyref-before-warn' to a value
> like 1000 or 500 instead of nil.  This would make me happy by not
> impacting any real use-cases [none of which will have 500+ commands in
> its docstring, or at least none of the ones that I care about will]
> and it would (hopefully) make you happy by sufficiently calling
> attention to any possible performance issues in some other cases.

I didn't realize that checkdoc is involved in this.  If the problem is
that it produces annoying diagnostics for \\[..], then I'm okay with
removing it or making it less frequent.

I was only talking about the manual.

> With that, perhaps we could agree that it is okay to delete the
> paragraph in `(elisp) Documentation Tips'.  Running 'checkdoc' is
> after all recommended in that section as well.  WDYT?

My reluctance to delete that advice is unrelated to checkdoc or what
it does.  I don't want to remove that advice completely, as I already
said and explained.  But I'm okay with making the text be a more
general advice as opposed to some rigid rule.