From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] doc-rst:c-domain: fix some issues in the c-domain
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:02:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160916100226.055683ed@lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473232378-11869-1-git-send-email-markus.heiser@darmarit.de>
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 09:12:55 +0200
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de> wrote:
> according to your remarks I fixed the first and second patch. The third patch is
> resend unchanged;
OK, I've applied the first two, finally.
> > Am 06.09.2016 um 14:28 schrieb Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>:
> >
> > As others have pointed out, we generally want to hide the difference
> > between functions and macros, so this is probably one change we don't
> > want.
>
> I read "probably", so there might be a chance to persuade you ;)
>
> I'm not a friend of *information hiding* and since the index is sorted
> alphabetical it does no matter if the entry is 'FOO (C function)' or 'FOO (C
> macro)'. The last one has the right information e.g. for someone how is looking
> for a macro. FOO is a function-like macro and not a function, if the author
> describes the macro he might use the word "macro FOO" but in the index it is
> tagged as C function.
Information hiding is the only way we can maintain the kernel and stay
sane. I have a hard time imagining why somebody would be looking for a
macro in particular; the whole idea is that they really shouldn't have to
care. So my inclination is to leave this one out, sorry.
Thanks,
jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-16 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-07 7:12 [PATCH v2 0/3] doc-rst:c-domain: fix some issues in the c-domain Markus Heiser
2016-09-07 7:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] doc-rst:c-domain: fix sphinx version incompatibility Markus Heiser
2016-09-07 7:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] doc-rst:c-domain: function-like macros arguments Markus Heiser
2016-09-07 7:12 ` [RFC v2 3/3] doc-rst:c-domain: function-like macros index entry Markus Heiser
2016-09-09 12:08 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] doc-rst:c-domain: fix some issues in the c-domain Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-09-09 12:25 ` Markus Heiser
2016-09-19 11:36 ` Markus Heiser
2016-09-19 15:00 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-09-20 18:56 ` Markus Heiser
2016-09-20 19:00 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-09-20 20:58 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-09-22 12:08 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-09-22 12:35 ` kernel-lintdoc parser - was: " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-09-22 22:03 ` Markus Heiser
2016-09-22 23:58 ` Markus Heiser
2016-09-16 16:02 ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2016-09-17 9:45 ` Markus Heiser
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=20160916100226.055683ed@lwn.net \
--to=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markus.heiser@darmarit.de \
--cc=mchehab@infradead.org \
/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).