From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 6 11:40:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC93616A4CE for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:40:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC0543D4C for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:40:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i96BeQaP043012 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:40:26 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i96BeQbZ043011; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:40:26 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:40:26 GMT Message-Id: <200410061140.i96BeQbZ043011@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org From: Giorgos Keramidas Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Giorgos Keramidas List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:40:26 -0000 The following reply was made to PR docs/72375; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Joseph Koshy Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:36:36 +0300 On 2004-10-06 16:53, Joseph Koshy wrote: > Suggested fix. > > .\" The following is Quite Ugly, but syntactically correct. > .\" Don't try to > .\" fix it. > -.Ft void \*(lp* > +.Ft void \*(lp*\*(rp > .Fn signal "int sig" "void \*(lp*func\*(rp\*(lpint\*(rp\*(rp\*(rp\*(lpint" Err, please no. The type of the return value of signal() is not really `void (*)' but something more like: void (*)(int) But this is not so easy to separate from the name of the signal() function without a typedef; at least not without breaking the validity of the C declaration, which is a bad thing since then manpage readers cannot copy/paste the prototype of signal() from its manpage.