From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Mar 8 22:50: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C4C37B405 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 22:50:02 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g296o2n46000; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 22:50:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 22:50:02 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200203090650.g296o2n46000@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Cc: From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Subject: Re: docs/35644: lo(4) page presumes familiarity with printf. Reply-To: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR docs/35644; it has been noted by GNATS. From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Dima Dorfman Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/35644: lo(4) page presumes familiarity with printf. Date: 08 Mar 2002 22:49:15 -0800 Dima Dorfman writes: > I wouldn't object to this being documented in some > of the intro(X) manual pages, but I don't think it's wise to change > all the pages that use this notation. The "to much work" argument is OK by me, though I think it's really a nasty, ugly thing outside of sections 2 & 3 which can presume knowledge of "C" while I'd like to hope that many users know nothing of it. Documenting the esoteric symbol is a poor substitute for using a symbol understood by almost everybody, as many will not read or remember it, but I guess it's better than nothing. As to where it's documented, it seems to me that the man(1) page would be better than the intro(*) pages, but either will do OK. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message