Question mark (?) command fails to find documentation for named argument

[MattHeffron]

Describe the bug The ? command alone displays documentation for all commands. If given a FUNCTION or COMMAND name, it reports "No documentation found". (I did not check with other definition types that have documentation strings.)

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. In Exec type: ? see [enter]
2. No documentation found is displayed
3. In Exec type: ?[enter]
4. The display will show documentation for all defined commands, including "see"

Expected behavior The documentation for the named argument is correctly displayed.

Context (please complete the following information):

• IL:MAKESYSDATE: 15-May-2024 11:18:00

[MattHeffron]

See also Issue #1725 (both related to the same PR #1736)

[masinter]

There is a problem with the “name” of a command in that commands are case and package independent but the file manager doesn’t know that.

So while the symbols SEE, see, CL:SEE and the strings "see" and "SEE" can be used to invoke the command, any of them, and any of them can be used in a DEFCOMMAND, the file manager and whereis don't take that into account. We should pick ONE of the choices and make others coerce.

Without getting too far ahead of the design issues around commands vs.functions, I would propose that we name a command with the INTERLISP package symbol all uppercase as the 'canonical' way of defining a command i.e. the DEFCOMMAND definer would (IL:MKATOM (IL:UCASE NAME)) and similarly the COMMANDS and WHERIS database.

This is a general problem but in this case the ? command in the CL Exec seems to pick up on xcl-user::?

[masinter]

The command ? see should work in the XCL exec too.