From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from joooj.vinc17.net (joooj.vinc17.net [155.133.131.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2589F158535 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 02:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=155.133.131.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751510102; cv=none; b=ncIDGlTewzAQqYB77bT2t5LUTg94PKd99BHSZ6JNm5v+rglx17mc9lD+AWFYMC9gGMy6F0lyRBaj/W5KSQUJyQpyOg/nuOHwPU0vgkhoZn2fqZ4yNRHx2C726F/8qI1iitdQdkbXLo2qgV74AiUipB9A1PjaeUOGMh2ttnZ19Z8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751510102; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SkJYparAKofva1yR1PrC+grBAAPck1m9rhdnx/ltbpI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Fh4w+da+5SahXtFnSHzjjps5jrE93mViaDcUdHZTgafgdBTWeEt/17TNfZR5wSSq38I8QwpjQS01TkacePe2MIMe1eViw6e7AOCy9+xs4+bNtCCKigX1sS9Jml+NlmgD+vIoT558mszUGSZ/8Ez80RGQpaC6I3Rhg+Aw8zVfWFk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=vinc17.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=vinc17.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=155.133.131.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=vinc17.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=vinc17.net Received: from smtp-qaa.vinc17.net (135.197.67.86.rev.sfr.net [86.67.197.135]) by joooj.vinc17.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC969328; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 04:34:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: by qaa.vinc17.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7400FCA016C; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 04:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 04:34:51 +0200 From: Vincent Lefevre To: Alejandro Colomar Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] man/: Replaced reserved exp identifier Message-ID: <20250703023451.GJ12583@qaa.vinc17.org> References: <20250702092516.GA2328014@cventin.lip.ens-lyon.fr> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Mailer-Info: https://www.vinc17.net/mutt/ User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.13+86 (bb2064ae) vl-169878 (2025-02-08) On 2025-07-02 16:41:28 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 11:25:16AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: [...] > > --- a/man/man2/timerfd_create.2 > > +++ b/man/man2/timerfd_create.2 > > @@ -639,12 +639,12 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[]) > > { > > int fd; > > ssize_t s; > > - uint64_t exp, tot_exp, max_exp; > > + uint64_t ex, tot_ex, max_ex; > > How about using 'to' for timeout? Do you think it makes sense? As described by the man page, this is more a timer expiration (many occurrences of words starting with "expir") than a timeout (a single occurrence - shouldn't this be "expiration time"?). So, for these 3 variables, instead of "exp", perhaps "te" for "timer expiration"? > > struct timespec now; > > struct itimerspec new_value; > > \& > > if (argc != 2 && argc != 4) { > > - fprintf(stderr, "%s init\-secs [interval\-secs max\-exp]\[rs]n", > > + fprintf(stderr, "%s init\-secs [interval\-secs max\-ex]\[rs]n", > > And here saying max\-timeout. One could actually let max\-exp. Or say max\-timer\-exp (the line would not be too large). [...] > > --- a/man/man3/frexp.3 > > +++ b/man/man3/frexp.3 > > @@ -14,9 +14,9 @@ Math library > > .nf > > .B #include > > .P > > -.BI "double frexp(double " x ", int *" exp ); > > -.BI "float frexpf(float " x ", int *" exp ); > > -.BI "long double frexpl(long double " x ", int *" exp ); > > +.BI "double frexp(double " x ", int *" p ); > > +.BI "float frexpf(float " x ", int *" p ); > > +.BI "long double frexpl(long double " x ", int *" p ); > > Here I think I'd use 'e' for exponent. What do you think? One could do that (this was more or less my initial idea, and I'm wondering why the committee chose p). BTW, for frexp, this is a pointer, while for ldexp, this is an integer. So, should there be a difference (e.g. pe for the pointer to the exponent, and e for the exponent)? -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Pascaline project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)