Re: Character literals for Unicode (control) characters

[Joost Kremers]

On Sat, Mar 05 2016, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Doc strings should never be wrapped with the likes of M-q.  For
> starters, this can make the first line include more than one
> sentence.

IME, if you hit M-q in a doc string, the first line isn't changed.
Perhaps that only works when point is not on the first line, though.

>  More generally, there are already constructs we recognize
> in doc strings that produce longer or shorter strings when displayed,
> so M-q is just not up to the job, and shouldn't be used.

But there's no real alternative, is there? IOW, you might as well use
M-q, because if you use something like \\[my-function], you never know
if that'll display as a short key binding, a long key binding, or as
`M-x my-function', which can actually be very long.

(I guess the best way would be to custom-wrap doc strings before
displaying them, after constructs such as \\[...] have been resolved.)

-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments