bug#62207: 29.0.60; Trying to remove non-existent key binding instead adds a binding

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>
> Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,  larsi@gnus.org,
>   jonas@bernoul.li,  62207@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:54:05 +0100
> 
> >>>>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 10:23:37 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> said:
> 
>     >> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>     >> Cc: Jonas Bernoulli <jonas@bernoul.li>,  Lars Ingebrigtsen 
> <larsi@gnus.org>,
>     >> 62207@debbugs.gnu.org
>     >> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:02:59 -0400
>     >> 
>     >> > Stefan, it sounds like the part of store_in_keymap after the label
>     >> > keymap_end should do nothing if REMOVE is non-zero, am I right?
>     >> 
>     >> Sounds right, yes.
> 
>     Eli> Then Robert, please install on the emacs-29 branch the part of your
>     Eli> suggested patch which fixes the problem with REMOVE.  The other part
>     Eli> should go to master, I think.
> 
> The former I can do. Stefan seemed to object to the other part. Itʼs
> also not been tested a great deal 😀

OK, then just the emacs-29 part for now.  The rest is not urgent
anyway.

>     >> This said, the semantics of REMOVE a bit murky, so I'd rather tell
>     >> people not to use it.
> 
>     Eli> Robert, could you please say something to this effect in the doc
>     Eli> string?
> 
> Sorry to be difficult, but why? I think the semantics are clear,
> although Iʼd prefer it if the first line of the docstring for
> `keymap-unset' said
> 
>     Unset key sequence KEY in KEYMAP.
> 
> to reduce confusion with the REMOVE argument.

If this part is still controversial, I'm okay with only fixing the bug
itself.  As for REMOVE, let's see what Stefan has to say in defense of
his request, and take it from there.

Thanks.