GNU bug report logs - #63557
26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 63557 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 63557 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:43:17 +0000

Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.

In GNU Emacs 26.3 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 of 2019-08-29
Repository revision: 96dd0196c28bc36779584e47fffcca433c9309cd
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 10.0.19045
Configured using:
 `configure --without-dbus --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
 --without-compress-install 'CFLAGS=-O2 -static -g3''

Message #8 received at 63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of `find-file-run-dired'
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 08:23:22 +0300

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 19:43:17 +0000
> 
> Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.

How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
not allow" mean when the value is nil?

IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.

Message #11 received at 63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of
 `find-file-run-dired'
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 15:35:03 +0000

> > Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> > directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> > nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.
>
> How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
> not allow" mean when the value is nil?
> IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
> case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.

That you can't visit a directory is one thing.
That trying to do that raises an error is a
different thing.  Another possible behavior
that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
A third is to show a message, without raising
an error.

Not being able to do something is not the same
as having an error raised if you try to do it.

Message #16 received at 63557-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 63557-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of
 `find-file-run-dired'
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 18:46:30 +0300

> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> CC: "63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <63557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
> Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 15:35:03 +0000
> 
> > > Instead of just saying that non-nil allows `find-file' to visit
> > > directories, say also (as does (emacs) `Visiting') that otherwise (i.e.,
> > > nil) raises an error when the arg is a directory name.
> >
> > How would you interpret "allows" in any other sense?  What could "does
> > not allow" mean when the value is nil?
> > IOW, I don't see why would we need to spoon-feed the user in this
> > case.  The meaning of nil is crystal clear to me.
> 
> That you can't visit a directory is one thing.

The doc string says "allows", not "can".

> That trying to do that raises an error is a
> different thing.  Another possible behavior
> that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
> A third is to show a message, without raising
> an error.
> 
> Not being able to do something is not the same
> as having an error raised if you try to do it.

You are splitting hair for no good reason.

Closing.

Message #19 received at 63557-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "63557-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <63557-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: bug#63557: 26.3; Doc string of
 `find-file-run-dired'
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 16:06:49 +0000

> > That you can't visit a directory is one thing.
> 
> The doc string says "allows", not "can".

That you're not allowed to visit a directory is
one thing.  That an error is raised is another.

> > That trying to do that raises an error is a
> > different thing.  Another possible behavior
> > that doesn't visit a directory is to do nothing.
> > A third is to show a message, without raising
> > an error.
> >
> > Not being able to do something is not the same
> > as having an error raised if you try to do it.
> 
> You are splitting hair for no good reason.

Tell that to the manual, which rightfully makes
clear that an error is raised.

Ask yourself if you're perhaps refusing a simple
doc fix for no good reason.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.