[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191015122726.7e12f551@lwn.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:27:26 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: rename the kernel-doc directive 'functions'
to 'specific'
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 13:53:59 +0800
Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com> wrote:
> The 'functions' directive is not only for functions, but also works for
> structs/unions. So the name is misleading. This patch renames it to
> 'specific', so now we have export/internal/specific directives to limit
> the functions/types to be included in documentation. Meanwhile we improved
> the warning message.
I agree with the others that "specific" doesn't really make things
better. "Interfaces" maybe; otherwise we could go for something like
"filter" or "select".
Paint mine green :)
Whatever we end up with, I think it should be added as a synonym for
"functions". Then the various selectors that are actually pulling out
docs for functions could be changed at leisure - or not at all. I'd
rather not see a big patch changing everything at once.
Thanks,
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists