-----Original Message----- From: Jani Nikula on October 13, 2019 11:00 PM On Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Changbin Du changbin.du@gmail.com wrote:
The 'functions' directive is not only for functions, but also works for structs/unions. So the name is misleading. This patch renames it to 'specific', so now we have export/internal/specific directives to limit the functions/types to be included in documentation. Meanwhile we
improved
the warning message.
Agreed on "functions" being less than perfect. It directly exposes the idiosyncrasies of scripts/kernel-doc. I'm not sure "specific" is any better, though.
I strongly agree with this. 'specific' IMHO, has no semantic value and I'd rather just leave the only-sometimes-wrong 'functions' than convert to something that obscures the meaning always.
Perhaps "symbols" would be more self-explanatory. Or, actually make "functions" only work on functions, and add a separate keyword for other stuff. *shrug*
My preference would be to use 'symbols'. I tried to come up with something but 'symbols' is better than anything I came up with.
Seems like the patch is way too big. I'd probably add "symbols" (or whatever) as a synonym for "functions" for starters, and convert documents piecemeal, and finally drop the old one.
The scripts/kernel-doc change should be a patch of its own.
Agreed on these two points as well.
Just adding my 2 cents. -- Tim