RE: [Emacs-diffs] widen-limits c331b66: Implement buffer-widen-limits functionality

[Drew Adams]

> > And the text about indentation and the use of sub-mode for only a given
> > chunk of text in a buffer is incomprehensible without some explanation.
> > Normally, a major mode, no matter whether it is derived from some other
> > major mode, has its effect on the entire buffer.
> >
> > It seems there is some non-negligible functionality/behavior/feature
> > that has not been documented.  Not up to Emacs standards, it appears.
> >
> > It looks like someone perhaps implemented something and just tossed
> > some minimal doc into the manual, in the form of doc-string-like text
> > for a couple functions.  Insufficient.
> 
> "Compliments" such as these for something that caused me a
> considerable effort to produce where no documentation by the code
> developers existed in the first place is a very efficient method of
> convincing me never to make such efforts again.  Not for this
> community, anyway.  Thanks a lot!

Please consider it instead as a statement that "the code
developers" for this feature (whatever it might be) should
themselves have documented it.  Which is also what I think
you suggest.

My plaint wrt what the user sees now (incomplete doc) is
essentially the same as your plaint that the code developers
did not provide adequate doc.  I don't at all complain about
your effort to improve a complete lack by providing something
helpful.

You improved things by adding some explanation.  I made a
(minor) effort to improve things after that, by saying that,
IMO, the doc is still not sufficient.

My guess is that those responsible for adding this feature
are the best placed to provide the technical content (if not
necessarily the wording) for telling users what it is.

I don't know what that content is - dunno what the feature is.
As a user learning about this question for the first time, I
searched the manuals for "sub-mode" and similar expressions
to learn more, and came up empty-handed.  I reported that.

Perhaps you too have only a partial feel for this feature.
I have no gripe whatsoever with what you've done to help us
understand this, Eli.  Quite the contrary.

Had you not documented this at all, I would not have noticed
it and would not have posed questions about it.  You need not
be defensive about my saying the doc is incomplete here.
You can be proud that you tried to make it more complete.

Thank you for that.  In fact, I thank Emacs everyday for your
unflagging concern about the doc and your efforts to maintain
and improve it.

This concern with doc is an Emacs tradition that dates from
Day One and for which RMS was always a prominent advocate and
participant.  Today, you remain the main stalwart in this
endeavor.  Thank goodness you are still at it.