Re: "internal" designation [

[Tino Calancha]

Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> writes:

> On 11.10.2016 19:20, Drew Adams wrote:
>> (Sorry - I initially put this in a reply to the bug thread.
>> Meant to send it here.)
>>
>>>   (defun thing-at-point-bounds-of-list-at-point ()
>>>     "Return the bounds of the list at point.
>>> -[Internal function used by `bounds-of-thing-at-point'.]"
>>> +\[Internal function used by `bounds-of-thing-at-point'.\]"
>> FWIW:
>>
>> I object to such an "internal" designation being in that doc string.
>
> BTW this function looks redundant - can't see why lists shouldn't be
> dealt with from
>
> bounds-of-thing-at-point
I don't think is redundant.  This function allows to write
a much simple `bounds-of-thing-at-point'.  Try to write a
`bounds-of-thing-at-point' which handles symbol, list, sexp, etc.  You
will see why it's nice to have `thing-at-point-bounds-of-list-at-point'.

Similar 'thing' happen with number: `bounds-of-thing-at-point' doesn't
return the boundaries of a number.  Instead, the boundaries of a number
are obtained with `thing-at-point-looking-at' inside `number-at-point'.
I guess, trying to modify `bounds-of-thing-at-point' to match all kind
of entities would increase the complexity of that function too much.