[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f4157a18-6c2e-9854-40a2-dd78c9bde5ea@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:08:04 +0200
From: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Tim.Bird@...y.com, jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
changbin.du@...il.com, corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: rename the kernel-doc directive 'functions'
to 'specific'
Hi
Am 15.10.19 um 13:54 schrieb Matthew Wilcox:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 11:25:53AM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>> My preference would be to use 'symbols'. I tried to come up with something
>>> but 'symbols' is better than anything I came up with.
>>
>> Maybe 'interfaces' or 'artifacts'. The term 'symbols' is just as
>> imprecise as 'functions'.
>
> I suggested 'identifier' because that's the term used in the C spec (6.2.1):
>
> : An identifier can denote an object; a function; a tag or a member
> : of a structure, union, or enumeration; a typedef name; a label name;
> : a macro name; or a macro parameter.
>
> We don't allow documenting all those things separately, but it does cover
> all the things we do allow to be individually documented.
>
Yeah, makes sense.
Best regards
Thomas
--
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists