bug#46627: [PATCH] Add new help command 'describe-command'

[Stefan Kangas]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Please remember this when we discuss use of functions in user-level
> features, such as values for user options.

Yes, I actually mostly agree with you on that point already.

Thank you for your very helpful comments.  I tried fixing them in the
attached patch.

>> +@code{make-vector} properly, type @kbd{C-h f make-vector
>> +@key{RET}}.
>
> When a long text in |@kbd (or any other Texinfo markup) is near a
> line's end, it is better to wrap it in @w{..}, so that it won't be
> broken in half by the end of line.

I tried wrapping it in @w{..} but I wasn't able to get it to avoid line
breaks.  Perhaps I'm doing something wrong, but I tried fixing these
cases manually for now.

>> +    (unless (and fn (symbolp fn))
>> +      (user-error "You didn't specify a function symbol"))
>> +    (unless (or (fboundp fn) (get fn 'function-documentation))
>> +      (user-error "Symbol's function definition is void: %s" fn))
>
> These messages say "function" regardless of whether the user typed
> "C-h x" or "C-h f".  Is that optimal?

Hmm, good point.  I made an attempt at making this more user-friendly
and less technical in the attached patch by introducing two new
messages:

1. "You didn't specify a valid command name"
2. "No such command: %s"

WDYT?

Hmm, but now that I'm testing this, I'm not sure how to arrive at these
messages from `C-h x'.  I just get a "no match" message for anything
that is not a valid command name.  So can you reach this only from Lisp
or something?  Should the more technical explanations therefore stay?

0001-Add-new-help-command-describe-command.patch
Description: Text Data