how to insert an infix as last item in a group

[mooseyboots]

i'm using transient-insert-suffix to add an infix to an existing prefix (following "Modifying Existing Transients" in the manual, and using the showcase also), and i'm struggling with the LOC argument.

i can use say (2 -1), to identify the last item in group 3, but my new item will be inserted before it. whereas if i choose (3 0) it will be inserted as first in the next group. if i use `(3) on its own, it tries to insert the infix as a sibling of the group, which isn't allowed.

is there a way to insert an infix as last item in a group?

(also, i think there is some ambiguity about the LOC arg in the docs, sometimes it says it will be inserted after LOC, sometimes before.)

[tarsius]

There are two function for inserting a binding

• transient-insert-suffix inserts before LOC.
• transient-append-suffix inserts after LOC.

is there a way to insert an infix as last item in a group?

Use transient-append-suffix.

(also, i think there is some ambiguity about the LOC arg in the docs, sometimes it says it will be inserted after LOC, sometimes before.)

The docstrings of these functions mention the respective correct "direction". In the manual "before" and "after" appear in the shared item about transient-insert-suffix and transient-append-suffix. The function names and directions appear in the same order, unambiguously linking each direction to just one function, but I guess I could be more verbose.

 - Function: transient-insert-suffix prefix loc suffix &optional keep-other ::
 - Function: transient-append-suffix prefix loc suffix &optional keep-other ::
 
-  These functions insert the suffix or group {{{var(SUFFIX)}}} into {{{var(PREFIX)}}} before
-  or after {{{var(LOC)}}}.
+  These functions insert the suffix or group {{{var(SUFFIX)}}} into {{{var(PREFIX)}}} next
+  to the location specified by LOC.  ~transient-insert-suffix~ inserts
+  before LOC and ~transient-append-suffix~ inserts after LOC.

"before" does not appear a second time in this section. "after" does appear one more time, and it is clear that that instance is about transient-append-suffix. So no, there is no ambiguity; you just overlooked that transient-append-suffix exists.

[mooseyboots]

ah, sorry, that's the trick. problem solved. sorry i missed it in the docs, reading too fast...?