Re: [ELPA] New package: transient

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 03.05.2020 19:47, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Not the manual, the documentation commands in general.  They don't
> only use the manual.

The apropos command has pretty much the same problem with filtering and 
ordering. Only more difficult, since it offers more matches.

Having function names more consistency named would help with it too.

Personal note: I don't like it's output. It's noisy and hard to scan 
visually. But that has little bearing on the argument.

> And I don't see what's wrong with that.  I saw what I thought was the
> wrong tool for the job, so I suggested to use a better tool.  Why do I
> have to "acknowledge" a problem in using a wrong tool, instead of
> pointing out that it's wrong?  Why is it "reasonable" to used the
> wrong tool and expect that it produces optimal results?  It isn't.

Calling a tool that many people have been employing for years 
"inadequate" is mildly insulting and dismissive of others' experience.

Even if I start using apropos and the manual more, I will continue using 
code completion and describe-xxx commands nevertheless, and better 
naming would still help there.