bug#12985: eval-last-sexp looks broken when executed twice

[Kelly Dean]

> It's not a bug, it's a feature of
> eval-expression-print-format.
Sorry for the mistaken bug report. I should have read the source code, and 
reported this bug as a documentation deficiency instead, since the help pages 
for eval-last-sexp and eval-print-last-sexp say nothing about 
eval-expression-print-format or about behaving differently when called twice.
I propose adding to the doc strings for eval-last-sexp and 
eval-print-last-sexp, "If the value is an integer, and this command is called 
twice in succession, then in addition to printing the decimal representation, 
also print the octal and hex representations and char interpretation of the 
value."
BTW the doc string for eval-last-sexp says "print value in minibuffer." which 
should be "print value into echo area."

Also, eval-expression-print-format omits the char if the invoking command name 
is not eval-last-sexp or eval-print-last-sexp. Why? For example, if I do
M-x eval-expression [ret] 5 [ret]
I only get
5 (#o5, #x5)
I don't see why not simplify it to:

(defun eval-expression-print-format (value)
  "Format VALUE as a result of evaluated expression if invoked twice, invoked 
as a name other than eval-last-sexp or eval-print-last-sexp, or if in debug 
mode. Return a formatted string that is displayed in the echo area in addition 
to the value printed by prin1 in functions which display the result of 
expression evaluation."
  (if (and (integerp value)
           (or (not (memq this-command '(eval-last-sexp eval-print-last-sexp)))
               (eq this-command last-command)
               (if (boundp 'edebug-active) edebug-active)))
      (let ((char-string (prin1-char value)))
        (if char-string
            (format " (#o%o, #x%x, %s)" value value char-string)
          (format " (#o%o, #x%x)" value value)))))

Even then the design seems wrong. It's designed to avoid producing the string 
the first time eval-last-sexp or eval-print-last-sexp is called, regardless of 
whether the result will be displayed in the echo area (in which case I don't 
see any reason to avoid it) or printed into the buffer (in which case avoiding 
it is good since the user probably wants just the decimal representation).
And it makes one of my custom functions fail to work the same as eval-last-sexp 
when intended, which is what brought all this to my attention in the first 
place:

(defun eval-region-or-last-sexp () "Eval region if active; otherwise, eval last 
sexp and print value into echo area or, with prefix argument, into current 
buffer. See `eval-region' and `eval-last-sexp' for details."
 (interactive)
 (if mark-active
  (call-interactively 'eval-region)
  (call-interactively 'eval-last-sexp)))

I can fix my function using (setq this-command 'eval-last-sexp), but that's a 
kludge.
It seems a better design would be to always include the string, even the first 
time, when displaying in the echo area, and never include the string when 
printing into the buffer, regardless of the invoking command name. This is 
simpler, and it's how eval-expression already works.

Regarding lack of hard word wrap in the doc strings above, it's because I 
propose
(add-hook 'help-mode-hook (lambda () (toggle-word-wrap 1)))