[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201015152603.6b2c40cd@lwn.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:26:03 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 35/80] docs: fs: fscrypt.rst: get rid of :c:type:
tags
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 07:32:07 +0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:
> > That will apply to most (maybe all) of the structures mentioned in this file.
> > I expected that if the documentation system now automatically recognizes
> > 'struct foo', then it would render it in code font even when 'struct foo' isn't
> > documented. Any particular reason why that isn't the case? Not like I care
> > much myself, but it's a bit unexpected and it means this change actually makes
> > the rendered documentation look worse...
>
> Yeah, I agree that using monospaced fonts on this case too would
> be nice. The C domain actually uses italic monospaced fonts for
> broken XREFs.
>
> I suspect that changing this at automarkup.py would be simple, but
> not sure if it would be safe.
>
> Jon can tell more about that, as he's the author of automarkup,
> but I suspect that the reason for the current behavior is to avoid
> false-positives.
Automarkup has always behaved that way because ... well, because nobody
got around to changing it. I don't see any reason not to use a monospace
font for such things, just without a link; shouldn't be a problem to do.
I'll see if I can't get to it once things stabilize a bit.
Thanks,
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists