From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] migrate api-strbuf.txt into strbuf.h
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 04:02:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150116090225.GA30797@peff.net> (raw)
This is a re-roll of this series:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/260922/focus=261374
from early December to move the strbuf documentation into the header
file. I've incorporated all of the minor formatting feedback and
suggestions from Jonathan and Stefan in response to that series.
Patch 2 is new from Stefan, and just fixes the comment blocks that
already existed in strbuf.h to be consistent.
Patches 3-5 are the same as the old 2-4 (modulo a header I missed in the
original of 5).
Both Junio and Jonathan noted that tighter grouping of related functions
can be more readable in some places. Patches 6 and 7 adjust those two
spots. This moves us farther from a single comment describing each
function, which may make extracting the documentation later harder. But
I think it makes reading the in-header documentation much more pleasant.
[1/7]: strbuf.h: integrate api-strbuf.txt documentation
[2/7]: strbuf.h: unify documentation comments beginnings
[3/7]: strbuf.h: drop asciidoc list formatting from API docs
[4/7]: strbuf.h: format asciidoc code blocks as 4-space indent
[5/7]: strbuf.h: reorganize api function grouping headers
[6/7]: strbuf.h: drop boilerplate descriptions of strbuf_split_*
[7/7]: strbuf.h: group documentation for trim functions
The two things I _didn't_ do are:
1. Read through for possible places to use `backticks` or other
punctuation to make the source more readable. I think this is a
good goal, but it's largely orthogonal, so we can build it on top
just as easily (and also, it's tedious; I'm happy to work towards
that goal slowly as I touch or read specific pieces of
documentation).
2. We do not consistently use parameter names in declarations. They
have no meaning to the compiler, of course, but they are a good way
of making the documentation more readable, since it gives us a
concrete name to refer to (and also some declarations are simply
confusing, such as when there are two ints next to each other;
which is which?). This is in the same boat as (1). I think it's a
good direction, but I did not make a pass. Patches welcome. :)
And of course the elephant in the room is the other dozen or more
api-*.txt files. I'd propose to do this strbuf.h series (and possible
follow-ons mentioned above) and stop there for a bit. That will let us
form a more coherent opinion on whether we like this system in practice,
how it ages as functions are changed and added, etc. That might affect
how or if we end up converting other files.
It does leave us in an inconsistent state (some documentation is in
Documentation/technical, and some is in the headers), but I think that
is largely where we're at today. IMHO this is a strict improvement
because at least the logical chunk of "strbuf" is now in a single place.
-Peff
next reply other threads:[~2015-01-16 9:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-16 9:02 Jeff King [this message]
2015-01-16 9:04 ` [PATCH 1/7] strbuf.h: integrate api-strbuf.txt documentation Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:04 ` [PATCH 2/7] strbuf.h: unify documentation comments beginnings Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:05 ` [PATCH 3/7] strbuf.h: drop asciidoc list formatting from API docs Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:05 ` [PATCH 4/7] strbuf.h: format asciidoc code blocks as 4-space indent Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:05 ` [PATCH 5/7] strbuf.h: reorganize api function grouping headers Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:05 ` [PATCH 6/7] strbuf.h: drop boilerplate descriptions of strbuf_split_* Jeff King
2015-01-16 9:06 ` [PATCH 7/7] strbuf.h: group documentation for trim functions Jeff King
2015-02-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 0/7] migrate api-strbuf.txt into strbuf.h Junio C Hamano
2015-02-12 23:05 ` Jeff King
2015-02-16 22:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-17 23:00 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150116090225.GA30797@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).