Subject: bug#6576: documentation `string-to-char' is incorrect

From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:00:17 +0200

Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:

>> But after checking it in, I started wondering whether this doc string
>> really makes sense.  The function returns an Emacs character, and it
>> would be rather weird if all functions that take or return an Emacs
>> character goes through that entire explanation.
>
> Which other functions would need this?

`char-after', `aref' on a string, `following-char'...  Basically
anything that returns a character.

>> Is there a specific reason this particular function deserves this
>> detailed explanation?
>
> If you can suggest a better one that takes care of the original bug
> report, please show your suggestion.

I think "close, notabug" would have taken care of the bug report.  :-)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/