Re: ~Make emacs friendlier: package documentation [POC CODE INCLUDED]

[Boruch Baum]

On 2020-10-16 09:39, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Thanks.  To me this sounds like your code could be used to extend "C-h P"
> in useful ways.  Perhaps the result of "C-h P" should include a button
> "More information" or something that could produce an Org buffer with
> the additional stuff.  WDYT?
>
> The main point, I think, is not to create another command whose
> functionality overlaps with an existing one, but instead extend the
> existing command to do more when requested.

1) I share the sentiment about consolidating the help/describe commands,
   and have no objection to the feature being accessed via a link in
   describe-package (ie. no direct dedicated keybinding).

   1.1) The output of the proof-of-concept code (for now I'll call it
        pack-doc, though I don't like the name) can kind of act as a
        surrogate for a package's info manual, so it might make sense to
        also have an entry point somehow from that angle, but I don't
        have an idea for how to do that.

   1.2) The output is also meant to be useful for emacs developers and
        bug-fixers, in that the org-mode format allows them get a
        birds-eye view of the symbol landscape, and easily navigate
        about, swooping in and out to view docstrings.

        1.2.1) For this target audience, it might be desirable to
               include the actual lisp code in sub-sub-headings or in
               collapsed code blocks, but that might confuse other users
               / audiences.

2) I do have a personal agenda with this proposal, and I want to be
   explicit about it.

   2.1) Make it easier for emacs code contributors to document their
        work to best user effect and with least programmer effort /
        duplication.

   2.2) Encourage literate programming in elisp files beyond simply
        docstrings. I see many package files that are conscientiously
        documented, yet also see many core-emacs packages whose
        documentation amount to just stubs.

3) pack-doc can operate on any elisp file that complies with emacs
   coding standards, even if it isn't on the package list and doesn't
   show up as a completion option for describe-package. In testing, I
   discovered dired.el as an example of a file that would be of interest
   but couldn't be accessed with the current method used by
   describe-package. Some options for such cases:

   2.1) Change the completion/input code for describe-package (con: messy).

   2.2) Allow direct interactive access to the feature, but without a
        keybinding (con: adds another obscure feature).

4) Have you (or anyone on the list, don't be shy) tried it on an el file?

--
hkp://keys.gnupg.net
CA45 09B5 5351 7C11 A9D1  7286 0036 9E45 1595 8BC0