Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs

[조성빈]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> 작성:

> > From: Jean-Christophe Helary <address@hidden>
> > Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 16:47:11 +0900
> > Cc: Philippe Vaucher <address@hidden>,
> >  address@hidden,
> >  address@hidden,
> >  address@hidden,
> >  address@hidden,
> >  address@hidden
> >
> > > > For quite a lot of people, this page
> > > > http://ergoemacs.org/emacs/elisp_string_functions.html is much simpler
> > > > to use & learn from than this page
> > > > https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Strings-and-Characters.html
> > > >
> > > > It does not mean that the later page is bad, it is actually more  
> > > > complete,
> > > > better documented, already grouped
> > > > in topics... and yet, a lot of people prefer the first page...  
> > > > straight to
> > > > the point, simple examples.
> > > >
> > > > Please tell me if you are able to understand this, if you cannot I'll  
> > > > try to
> > > > explain further.
> > >
> > > I understand this very well, I'm just astonished to hear that this is
> > > all the documentation you and some others want to see or have.
> >
> > Nobody claimed that it was *all* we want to see or have. Quite the  
> > contrary.
>
> Maybe we are in two different discussions, then.  Because the above
> clearly says: "this page (ergoemacs) is much simpler to use & learn
> from than this page (ELisp)".  IOW, it sees the ergoemacs page as a
> better _replacement_ for the ELisp manual.  If this doesn't mean that
> the ELisp manual is not needed, then maybe I have basic
> misunderstanding of written English.

So to me, the ergoemacs page is useful for various situations like…
* One knows basic Elisp knowledge but have not used any string APIs. So one
  wants to know various operations that Emacs already provides.
* One have already written Elisp to be familiar enough about the string APIs,
  knows that there are APIs that allow replacing string using a regex, but
  doesn’t remember the replace-regexp-in-string name.

The Elisp manual in the other hand, is useful for situations like…
* One wants to know exactly how strings work in Elisp - what happens if the
  argument of string-to-number is a garbage string?
* Would there be some options to number-to-string, like bases? Or should I
  implement them myself?

> Or maybe your opinion is different from that of Philippe, but then I
> was responding to Philippe, and in any case "nobody claimed" is then
> inaccurate, isn't it?
>
> > There is a need for such a summary *that also links at the current
> > documentation*, as I also replied.
> >
> > That "summary" (regardless of how it is implemented) does not exist  
> > today and
> > that is partly what this whole thread is about.
>
> AFAIU, the request for such a summary is quite new in this discussion,
> and is definitely not "what this whole thread is about.".  Most of
> this thread is about something entirely different: changing the names
> of APIs so that completion could be more useful for discovery.