On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 01:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Matti Linnanvuori wrote:
> If you want to maintain the convention of documenting the interface only in
> .c files,
> you should write the convention in so many places in .h files that no one
> could overlook it.
> But I think the convention is bad and it
If you want to maintain the convention of documenting the interface only in .c
files,
you should write the convention in so many places in .h files that no one could
overlook it.
But I think the convention is bad and it would be better to document the
interface also in
.h files where it is defi
Matti Linnanvuori wrote:
Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Another convention is that we put kernel-doc with the implementation
(i.e., in .c files) when possible, not with the function prototype.
Of course, for inline functions or macros in header files, that's
where the kernel-doc has to live.
Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Another convention is that we put kernel-doc with the implementation
> (i.e., in .c files) when possible, not with the function prototype.
> Of course, for inline functions or macros in header files, that's
> where the kernel-doc has to live.
>
> so we don't need
On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:41:17 -0700 (PDT) Matti Linnanvuori wrote:
> From: Matti Linnanvuori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Reference to two different conventions is unnecessarily unclear unless you
> know them already and requires seeking and reading another file for
> understanding.
Could you hit t
From: Matti Linnanvuori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reference to two different conventions is unnecessarily unclear unless you know
them already and requires seeking and reading another file for understanding.
Signed-off-by: Matti Linnanvuori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- linux-2.6.23-rc7/include/linux/m
6 matches
Mail list logo
