Re: Replace trivial pcase occurrences in the Emacs sources

[Stefan Monnier]

> Not everybody is familiar with dolist by any means.  Is dolist's doc
> string of sufficiently high quality to act as this basis?

If dolist's docstring is not good enough, then I don't think it's
pcase-dolist's job to fix it.

>> We do have to keep the reference to `pcase` because we don't want to
>> repeat the definition of what a pcase pattern can look like.
>
> Yes, I think that's right.
>
> Things I believe MUST appear explicitly in the doc string for
> pcase-dolist: 
> 1. It is a loop over the elements of LIST, which must be a list.
> 2. It attempts to match the current list element with the supplied
> PATTERN, which must be a valid pcase style pattern.
> 3. The BODY forms are evaluated for each element of the list.
> 4. The purpose of the matching is to create bindings for symbols, and
> these bindings are in force when the BODY forms are evaluated.
> 5. When a pattern match fails, ..... (This needs to be stated).

This is highly redundant w.r.t pcase-let and dolist.  Fine for the
manual, but not for docstrings.  You can click on the link to the
docstring of `dolist` and `pcase` (tho, I now see the link should go to
`pcase-let` instead).


        Stefan