RE: (fn ...) - please fill it at the point of generation

[Drew Adams]

>    If that is the intention, then, yes, it should be not only
>    semantically but also practically distinguished from the rest
>    of the string (which is presentation-ready). IOW, we should
>    have separate retrieval functions for the doc string per se and
>    the interface spec (signature).
>
> what you seek has been done, just not where you seek it.  the
> function `documentation' is called by others that make this
> distinction.  why don't you look at using those, instead?

I see, thank you. `help-split-fundoc' was apparently added in Emacs 22. I
can use that. I did not find any "others", but that one seems to work OK.

It's not foolproof (just matches "(fn ...)"), but if it's good enough for
`describe-function' then I guess it's good enough for me.

It makes the distinction you speak of only after the fact, however - it digs
out the signature (fn ...) after it was already embedded in the doc string.
I still say that it would be better to keep them separate and then put them
together when needed, instead of having to parse the combination like that.

And no, a string is not a good representation of a data structure with two
components. I agree that it can be better to have a single data structure
for this, with two components (doc and signature), but a string is not a
good choice for such a structure.

Oh well, sometimes Moh must go to the Mountain. In any case, thank you for
pointing me toward `help-split-fundoc'. I wasn't aware of it.