Re: The poor state of documentation of pcase like things.

[Phillip Lord]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> Simple change would be from:
>> 
>> Conditionals
>> 
>> * Pattern matching case statement::  How to use @code{pcase}.
>> 
>> 
>> to
>> 
>> Pattern Matching
>> 
>> * Conditional::  How to use @code{pcase}

>
> The last line can't be done, unless the node names are changed as
> well.  Right now the pcase description is in the child node of
> "Conditionals" whose name is "Pattern matching case statement".
>
> Also, I think having 2 nodes named "Conditionals" and "Conditional"
> will be too confusing.

Agreed. Hostage to fortune, if another pattern matching conditional is
invented.

"Pattern Matching" and "pcase" would work.

>> Pattern Matching
>> 
>> (this would contain a generalised introduction and tutorial, based
>> around pcase)
>> 
>> * List Clauses::            Destructuring Lists
>> * Predicates::              Matching with predicate functions
>> * Booleans::                and and or
>> * Guards::                  I don't quite understand guards
>> * Conditionals::            pcase
>> * Binding::                 pcase-let 
>> * Lambda::                  pcase-lambda
>
> These would be too short to justify a separate node, IMO.

They might be, yes. I'd write it and see. With examples for each, they
might get long enough.

>
>> * New Patterns:: pcase-macro, with description of seq and map support.
>
> We avoid using "new" in manuals, because they are that only for one
> release.

Sorry, poor working "Creating New Patterns" -- or perhaps "extending
pattern matching".

Phil