GNU bug report logs - #76199
30.0.93; completing-read-multiple is not documented in the manual

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Christopher Dimech <dimech <at> gmx.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: mail <at> daniel-mendler.de, Heime <heimeborgia <at> protonmail.com>, 76199 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#76199: 30.0.93; completing-read-multiple is not documented in the manual
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:21:55 +0100

> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 at 1:54 AM
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> To: "Heime" <heimeborgia <at> protonmail.com>
> Cc: mail <at> daniel-mendler.de, 76199 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Subject: bug#76199: 30.0.93; completing-read-multiple is not documented in the manual
>
> > Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 13:40:23 +0000
> > From: Heime <heimeborgia <at> protonmail.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Mendler <mail <at> daniel-mendler.de>, 76199 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > > We don't necessarily document every function. Is this one important
> > > enough to be in the manual?
> >
> > I have used it, and would like it to be in the manual.
>
> That's not a sufficient reason to add it, sorry.
>
> You need to realize that the ELisp manual is already too large: it
> prints in 2 volumes, each volume weighing in at hundreds of pages.  So
> we must be judicial in our decisions to add new stuff there.

The manual is not being read as a book but to get information about some
specific feature that makes it easier to use than  looking at docstrings.
The trend is towards a good automatic query search.  The only thing that
should happen is for the manual to increase in volume rather than reduce.

One suggestion would be to have the manual categorised, so one does not have
to search through its entirety to look at information on same aspect.

Previous Next

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