GNU bug report logs - #72787
31.0.50; Invalid describe-function completion candidates

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 72787 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eshel Yaron <me <at> eshelyaron.com>, pipcet <at> protonmail.com
Subject: bug#72787: 31.0.50; Invalid describe-function completion candidates
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 21:23:17 +0200

Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> Right, indeed this mechanism doesn't distinguish between variables and
> functions.

Thanks, this was a source of confusion, at least for me.

> It would be better to bail if our guessed set of prefixes is too
> large, since it's usually a sign that our heuristic just failed, as
> here.

That sounds like a good approach.

> These look correct to me, they're setter functions.

Ok, but I confess that I'd expect a symbol only here:

,----[ C-h f (setf seq-elt) RET ]
| \(setf\ seq-elt\) is a byte-code-function in ‘seq.el’.
| 
| (\(setf\ seq-elt\) ARG0 ARG &rest ARGS)
| 
| Not documented.
| 
| 
| This is a generic function.
| 
| Implementations:
| 
| (\(setf\ seq-elt\) STORE (SEQUENCE cons) N) in ‘seq.el’.
| 
| Undocumented
| 
| (\(setf\ seq-elt\) STORE (SEQUENCE array) N) in ‘seq.el’.
| 
| Undocumented
| 
`----

Best, Arash

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.