Re: typical TCL docu nonsens

Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote:

At Fri, 21 Jun 2024 21:55:54 -0000 (UTC) Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
 

 
et99 <et99@rocketship1.me> wrote:

On 6/21/2024 1:17 PM, aotto1968 wrote:
snip

 
the core problem is *not* the "autopath" is wrong because at the
time I use it I does not know it was wrong.  The core problem is
that is was *very* difficult to figure out what was the "right"
name.  special the tcl_traceExec?????? does not help and more important
the package.n docu (package require??????) does *not* spend a single word
on *how* to find a package.

 
I'm not sure if this would have helped in your case, but I've used
this with some success.  It outputs every package command issued and
by using a search pattern to limit the output to the ifneeded
commands, sometimes gets me what I need to know.

 
aotto1968's complaint is that the "package" man page does not mention
that the auto_path variable stores the search path list for finding
packages.  And, I looked, it does not make any mention of the
"specialness" of that variable.
 
On my Slack15 install, all of the Tcl special variables are documented
in a man page named "tcl_library" (although the page contents believes
it is named "tclvars").  So auto_path's specialness /is/ documented,
but unless one has discovered that it is documented in a different
manpage from 'package', one could very well spend a lot of time and not
find the proper docs.
 
So the least disruptive change to cover aotto1968's complaint would be
for aotto1968 to file a patch against the package man page adding a
"see tcl_library manpage for Tcl special variables related to package
handling".

 
I suspect that the tcl_library manpage is replicated from the tclvars man
page.

At least on a Slack 15 install, with the Slack distributed 8.6.12 it is
not ("tclvars" was what I tried first, as that is what it always has
been named).  Note that this could very well be a glitch in the way
Slackware built their 8.6.12.