Re: [PATCH v3 01/20] Documentation: locking: Describe seqlock design and usage

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 12:12:01PM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 11:04:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 07:44:33AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> > > +Sequence counters (:c:type:`seqcount_t`)
> > > +========================================
> >
> > > +.. code-block:: c
> >
> > I so hate RST, of course it's C. Also, ISTR Jon saying you can leave
> > that all out without issue.
> 
> There you go again.
> 
>   linux$ git grep 'code-block:: c' | wc -l
>   ==>  470
> 
>   linux$ git grep ':ref:' | wc -l
>   ==>  3171
> 
>   linux$ git grep ':c:type:' | wc -l
>   ==>  1533
> 
> In writing this, Documentation/doc-guide/ was followed, and literally
> the thousands of examples above.

Then this is a very bad guide. Jon, why is it recommending such horrible
crap? Should we add another field to MAINTAINERS to indicate RST/TXT
preference? Because I'm getting fed up trying to fix up all this
unreadable gunk.

I'm >< close to writing an script that will unconditionally and silently
convert everything to txt before committing.

> But honestly, I don't want to block merging documentation because of
> this, and the point of making the docs as readable as possible from text
> editors also has merit.
> 
> So... I'll just make that file as "RST-lite" as possible.

Thanks!