* Possibly misleading description of cflags parameter in regcomp(3)
@ 2013-09-22 18:41 Laurence Gonsalves
[not found] ` <CAJbtQC8O8D+MJvFehX7N_t7ewaOxwhH9ttJr_uQ9RA3mQC2MrA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Laurence Gonsalves @ 2013-09-22 18:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w; +Cc: linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Hello.
"man 3 regcomp" says "cflags may be the bitwise-or of one or more of
the following", but I'm fairly certain that 0 is also a legal value
for this parameter.
The page http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/regcomp.html
says "The cflags argument is the bitwise-inclusive OR of zero or more
of the following flags...".
If 0 is, indeed, a legal value then I think it would be more clear if
the manpage said "cflags may be the bitwise-or of zero or more of the
following".
(Sorry for the duplicate email. vger.kernel.org bounced the original
apparently due to Gmail's use of HTML.)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Possibly misleading description of cflags parameter in regcomp(3)
[not found] ` <CAJbtQC8O8D+MJvFehX7N_t7ewaOxwhH9ttJr_uQ9RA3mQC2MrA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
@ 2015-05-06 11:13 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) @ 2015-05-06 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Laurence Gonsalves
Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w,
linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Laurence,
On 09/22/2013 08:41 PM, Laurence Gonsalves wrote:
> Hello.
>
> "man 3 regcomp" says "cflags may be the bitwise-or of one or more of
> the following", but I'm fairly certain that 0 is also a legal value
> for this parameter.
>
> The page http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/regcomp.html
> says "The cflags argument is the bitwise-inclusive OR of zero or more
> of the following flags...".
>
> If 0 is, indeed, a legal value then I think it would be more clear if
> the manpage said "cflags may be the bitwise-or of zero or more of the
> following".
>
> (Sorry for the duplicate email. vger.kernel.org bounced the original
> apparently due to Gmail's use of HTML.)
Quite some time after your report...
I agree, and I've made the change.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-05-06 11:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-09-22 18:41 Possibly misleading description of cflags parameter in regcomp(3) Laurence Gonsalves
[not found] ` <CAJbtQC8O8D+MJvFehX7N_t7ewaOxwhH9ttJr_uQ9RA3mQC2MrA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-05-06 11:13 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.