Re: [PATCH 04/36] mutex, futex: adjust kernel-doc markups to generate ReST

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>]

Em Fri, 12 May 2017 15:19:17 -0700
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org> escreveu:

> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:11:09AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 06:51:50PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:  
> > > >  * Return:
> > > >  *  *  0 - ready to wait
> > > >  *  *  1 - acquired the lock
> > > >  *  * <0 - error
> > > > 
> > > > I'm fine with either though, just curious if this would be an improvement, or if
> > > > we have an established policy (which I didn't find in the docs on docs...).  
> > > 
> > > I prefer myself to use "-". IMHO, a dash is visually less polluted
> > > than an asterisk, when reading text files, but I guess this is a
> > > matter of taste.  
> > 
> > Not to mention it just reads very awkward in a comment. I don't much
> > care about it in any other context.  
> 
> Agreed, the - is better (and equally functional - so yay).
> 
> > 
> > And I really _really_ hate to see that rest crap spread here. Can't we
> > just delete all that nonsense and go back to 80 column 7bit ASCII ?
> >   
> 
> Depending on the source this could be a genuine appeal or satire.... :-D
> 
> In this case, I don't think the ReST changes (with -) make the comment block any
> less readable in the C files.
> 
> > It is an incentive not to use kerneldoc..

Very few kerneldoc markups need changes due to ReST introduction, and
usually is just whitespace/blank lines adjustment. Ok, someone could
try to improve the script to make it smarter[1], but, on my experiences
addressing it, usually doing the required changes make it visually
better on both C file and on PDF/LaTeX/HTML outputs.

[1] probably rewriting the entire script to work more like a lexical
    interpreter than a bunch of rejex expressions.

> I like the kerneldoc if for no other reason that it helps keeps formatting
> consistent. I would object if I started seeing XML or some other horrible
> formatting style showing up in the code, but this honestly seems like a fairly
> minimal imposition... but that's me.

IMHO, the best thing with kerneldoc is that it helps to keep the
documentation updated, as it warns when someone change the function
arguments without updating the comments.

Thanks,
Mauro