Re: Re: org-iswitchb documentation

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

On Jun 29, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Richard Riley wrote:

> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Jun 29, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Stephen Eglen wrote:
>>
>>>> THe doc string now reads:
>>>>
>>>> "Use `org-icompleting-read' to prompt for an Org buffer to switch
>>>> to.
>>>> With a prefix argument, restrict available to files.
>>>> With two prefix arguments, restrict available buffers to agenda
>>>> files.
>>>>
>>>> This will either use ido or iswitchb for buffer name completion,
>>>> depending on the variables `org-completion-use-iswitchb' and
>>>> `org-completion-use-ido'.  If both are nil, we will still use
>>>> iswitchb
>>>> for this special application."
>>>
>>> Hmmm... this sounds a bit confusing!  why not just have
>>> org-completion-use-ido, and if that is non-nil, we use ido, else we
>>> use
>>> iswitchb.  Unless these variables are also used in other contexts
>>> (which
>>> I doubt)?
>>
>> Oh yes, the are used in *many* contexts.  Whenever Org offers
>> completion which would not be made worse by using one of these  
>> packages,
>> it will offer that special kind of completion.
>>
>>>
>>> how about changing the 2nd para to:
>>>
>>> This will use iswitchb for buffer name completion, unless
>>> `org-completion-use-ido' is non-nil, to select ido completion
>
> I would suggest changing the function name to org-switchb (alias
> org-iswitchb to use it) and then the documentation reads:
>
> ,----
> | Switches between org buffers. Defaults to  iswitchb for buffer name
> | completion. Set `org-completion-use-ido' to  non nil to use ido
> | completion instead.
> `----

Richard, Eric, sorry for not listening earlier, you are right, and I am
npw following Richard's proposal for both naming and docstring.

- Carsten