[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation. |
Date: |
Wed, 6 May 2020 17:01:34 +0000 |
Hello, Clément.
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 17:11:43 -0400, Clément Pit-Claudel wrote:
> As far as I know, there's no way to provide documentation for a slot
> of a cl-defstruct. This sounds like a reasonable feature request
> (you're looking at an auto-generated docstring).
> > I certainly care about what this function does, and the one liner is
> > gibberish. "Access slot "def-name" of ‘edebug--frame’ struct CL-X."
> Really? You're looking at the documentation of a field accessor — can
> it be made much better (sort of writing it by hand)?
It could be made much better. For a start, it shouldn't be
syntactically ambiguous - It could be talking about "an access slot" or
"accessing the slot". I think you're telling me that the second is
meant.
And why such a woolly, meaningless word like "access"? Are we talking
about a read access or a write access here? It's a bit like writing in
a doc string "_consider_ the input value" - vague and unhelpful, and
calculated to get people writing angry rants on emacs-devel..
Now people have explained it, I see that it means "return the value of
the slot def-name". That is explicit and says what is done. Why can
that not be written?
And like you say above, even that much is only a little bit helpful when
the main thing needing documenting is the return value of the function
call - what precisely a def-name is. After all, in the doc string for
parse-partial-sexp, we don't just say it returns an 11-element list.
And why is the edebug--frame's metasyntactic variable called CL-X? If
somebody were trying deliberately to be unhelpful, that is what they
would call it.
> It's really the same as the following C function, assuming a struct
> called "backtrace" with a field called "def_name":
> def_name_t backtrace_def_name (backtrace) { return backtrace.def_name }
If the vagueness were fixed, so that that doc string was self-contained
and informative, I would be happy about it.
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Alan Mackenzie, 2020/05/05
- RE: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Drew Adams, 2020/05/05
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Clément Pit-Claudel, 2020/05/05
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation.,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Stefan Monnier, 2020/05/06
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/06
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Alan Mackenzie, 2020/05/08
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Stefan Monnier, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Alan Mackenzie, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., tomas, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Andreas Schwab, 2020/05/09
- Re: Poor quality documentation in edebug.el, and recursive documentation., Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09