Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:20:07 GMT From: Joseph Koshy <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) Message-ID: <200410061420.i96EK7Ks061348@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/72375; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Joseph Koshy <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:18:10 +0000 > Err, please no. The type of the return value of signal() is not really > `void (*)' but something more like: > > void (*)(int) Yes, my bad. Please ignore the previous misguided patch. > 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. Well the visual ugliness in the current manual page arises from the fact that the .Ft macro forces a line break after its idea of the "type" of the function. Using .Xo/.Xc suppresses this, and puts the whole declaration on one line. I don't know how to suppress the inter-argument spaces inserted by ".Ft". There is probably still scope for improvement of the patch below. Index: signal.3 =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/FreeBSD/src/lib/libc/gen/signal.3,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -u -u -r1.38 signal.3 --- signal.3 3 Jul 2004 22:30:08 -0000 1.38 +++ signal.3 6 Oct 2004 19:49:41 -0000 @@ -45,8 +45,9 @@ .\" The following is Quite Ugly, but syntactically correct. .\" Don't try to .\" fix it. -.Ft void \*(lp* +.Ft void \*(lp* Ns Xo .Fn signal "int sig" "void \*(lp*func\*(rp\*(lpint\*(rp\*(rp\*(rp\*(lpint" +.Xc .Pp or in .Fx Ns 's
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200410061420.i96EK7Ks061348>