[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#35222: 26.1; `read-command' documentation
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#35222: 26.1; `read-command' documentation |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:55:47 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
>> 1. The doc string does not say what happens if DEFAULT is not provided
>> (so `nil') and the user enters empty input. And what happens is not
>> obvious. Please add that information to the doc string.
> Um, can we declare the current behaviour a bug, and instead return nil
> in this case? That matches the current doc string (i.e., return
> DEFAULT-VALUE), and avoids the whole mess with the empty string symbol
> which is weird and pretty useless as far as I can tell.
Yes, it would seem to be more in line with the usual expected behavior.
The caller can get the current behavior by passing ## as the DEFAULT
argument, so there doesn't seem to be any good reason to return ## when
DEFAULT was nil.
Stefan