Re: [PATCH 1/3] timespec.3type: tv_nsec is impl-def-type, glibc llong not a bug

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1614 bytes --]

Hi Branden!

On 1/30/23 14:50, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> At 2023-01-30T14:15:50+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> On 1/30/23 08:08, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>>> * Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>, 2023-01-29 16:48:
>>>>> +.BR "    /*\(da*/   tv_nsec;" "  /* Nanoseconds [" 0 ", " 999999999 "] */"
>>>>
>>>> I'm tempted to merge this patch.  It's sooo qute /*↓*/
>>>
>>> I want man pages legible, not cute.
>>
>> I know, I know.
>>
>>> Please make it
>>>
>>>     /* see below */ tv_nsec
>>>
>>> or maybe
>>>
>>>     long /* but see below */ tv_nsec
>>>
>>> (given that C23 is not a thing yet).
>>
>> The reason why I seriously considered /*↓*/ is that it is a bit
>> shocking to the reader, which will prompt it to read the rest of the
>> page to see what the hell that is.
> 
> Even more shocking will be 'v', which is what it will degrade to on
> ASCII, ISO 8859, and code page 1047 terminals.  On top of being
> startling, it will look simply like an error.

Makes sense.

> 
>> I'm worried that if we make it `long` plus a comment to see below,
>> many will ignore it.
> 
> That's on them.  "/* see below */" means what it says.  A person cannot
> reasonably claim they weren't warned.
> 
>> /* see below */ with no mentions to `long` might be a reasonable
>> alternative. Maybe I'd use /* ... */
>>
>> What do y'all think about it?
> 
> I think
> 
> long /* see below */ tv_nsec;
> 
> meets the requirements at issue.

I think so.

Cheers,

Alex

> 
> Regards,
> Branden

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]