Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: rename the kernel-doc directive 'functions' to 'specific'
From: Thomas Zimmermann
Date: Tue Oct 15 2019 - 05:26:05 EST
Am 14.10.19 um 22:48 schrieb Tim.Bird@xxxxxxxx:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jani Nikula on October 13, 2019 11:00 PM
>> On Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Changbin Du <changbin.du@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The 'functions' directive is not only for functions, but also works for
>>> structs/unions. So the name is misleading. This patch renames it to
>>> 'specific', so now we have export/internal/specific directives to limit
>>> the functions/types to be included in documentation. Meanwhile we
>>> the warning message.
>> Agreed on "functions" being less than perfect. It directly exposes the
>> idiosyncrasies of scripts/kernel-doc. I'm not sure "specific" is any
>> better, though.
> I strongly agree with this. 'specific' IMHO, has no semantic value and
> I'd rather just leave the only-sometimes-wrong 'functions' than convert
> to something that obscures the meaning always.
>> Perhaps "symbols" would be more self-explanatory. Or, actually make
>> "functions" only work on functions, and add a separate keyword for other
>> stuff. *shrug*
> My preference would be to use 'symbols'. I tried to come up with something
> but 'symbols' is better than anything I came up with.
Maybe 'interfaces' or 'artifacts'. The term 'symbols' is just as
imprecise as 'functions'.
>> Seems like the patch is way too big. I'd probably add "symbols" (or
>> whatever) as a synonym for "functions" for starters, and convert
>> documents piecemeal, and finally drop the old one.
>> The scripts/kernel-doc change should be a patch of its own.
> Agreed on these two points as well.
> Just adding my 2 cents.
> -- Tim
> dri-devel mailing list
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 NÃrnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG NÃrnberg)
GeschÃftsfÃhrer: Felix ImendÃrffer
Description: OpenPGP digital signature