From: Dani Moncayo Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 01:18:41 +0000 (-0700) Subject: * emacs-lisp-intro.texi (beginning-of-buffer complete): Update function details. X-Git-Tag: emacs-24.3.90~173^2^2~42^2~45^2~387^2~1686^2~40 X-Git-Url: http://git.eshelyaron.com/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=5229f00af6b0a901903bff4c68c049b6eb80cb59;p=emacs.git * emacs-lisp-intro.texi (beginning-of-buffer complete): Update function details. Fixes: debbugs:15085 --- diff --git a/doc/lispintro/ChangeLog b/doc/lispintro/ChangeLog index a47183f4d27..7c2cf7c1e07 100644 --- a/doc/lispintro/ChangeLog +++ b/doc/lispintro/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2013-09-01 Dani Moncayo + + * emacs-lisp-intro.texi (beginning-of-buffer complete): + Update function details. (Bug#15085) + 2013-08-28 Paul Eggert * Makefile.in (SHELL): Now @SHELL@, not /bin/sh, diff --git a/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi b/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi index 18ea8e87e19..b3087a276a8 100644 --- a/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi +++ b/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi @@ -6323,7 +6323,7 @@ and avoids clobbering the mark." (/ (+ 10 (* size (prefix-numeric-value arg))) 10))) (point-min)))) - (if arg (forward-line 1))) + (if (and arg (not (consp arg))) (forward-line 1))) @end group @end smallexample @@ -6390,7 +6390,7 @@ to move point to the beginning of the next line if the command is invoked with an argument: @smallexample -(if arg (forward-line 1))) +(if (and arg (not (consp arg))) (forward-line 1)) @end smallexample @noindent @@ -6401,13 +6401,6 @@ tenths of the way through the buffer, which is a nicety that is, perhaps, not necessary, but which, if it did not occur, would be sure to draw complaints. -On the other hand, it also means that if you specify the command with -a @kbd{C-u}, but without a number, that is to say, if the `raw prefix -argument' is simply a cons cell, then the command puts you at the -beginning of the second line @dots{} I don't know whether this is -intended or whether no one has dealt with the code to avoid this -happening. - @node Second Buffer Related Review @section Review