Re: setlocale.3: Wording issues

[Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>]

Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> >>>>>        (a) using the values returned from a localeconv(3)  call  for  lo‐
> >>>>>            cale-dependent information;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>        (c) using the multibyte and wide character functions for text pro‐
> >>>>>            cessing if MB_CUR_MAX > 1; and
> >>>>>
> >>>>>        (c) using strcoll(3), wcscoll(3) or strxfrm(3), wcsxfrm(3) to com‐
> >>>>>            pare strings.

If you feel it's better to separate the functions for strings from the functions
for wide strings, I would write it like this:

        * using the values returned from a localeconv(3)  call  for  lo‐
          cale-dependent information;

        * using the multibyte and wide character functions for text pro‐
          cessing if MB_CUR_MAX > 1;

        * using strcoll(3) or strxfrm(3) to compare strings; and

        * using wcscoll(3) or wcsxfrm(3) to compare wide-character strings.

Regarding the type of enumeration, I generally use
  - (1), (2), (3), ... when the order matters, e.g. to describe steps that
    need to be done one after the other,
  - (a), (b), (c), ... for alternatives ("or"),
  - simple *, *, *, ... for other enumerations.

Bruno