bug#34749: 26.1; `delete-windows-on': (1) doc, (2) bug, (3) bug, (4) candidates

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 08:33:54 -0800 (PST)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Cc: 34749@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> >  >> That text is all right and yet was incomprehensible for me at first
> >  >> (and second) reading.  It's probably just me, so ignore that.
> >  >
> >  > Maybe we should improve it.  But I cannot tell how, because "a
> >  > sequence of elements separated by newlines, one for each argument" is
> >  > very clear for me.  If you can tell what was incomprehensible in that,
> >  > maybe we will be able to come up with an improvement.
> > 
> > The text is too perfect with two cross references, a footnote and an
> > example with a hacker idiom.  Not a single redundancy, not a word to
> > miss.  Probably too terse for me.
> 
> I wonder if it would help to give an example where
> we show correspondence between a spec that uses a
> string argument to `interactive' that specifies a
> few args to the function, of different types, and
> a spec that uses a Lisp sexp, which when evaluated
> produces a list of those same args.

There's an example right after that text.