Re: restrict in comments was Re: Patch - Add restrict to time.h

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen at redhat dot com>]

On Nov 25 17:20, Craig Howland wrote:
> 
> On 11/25/2013 12:57 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >On 11/25/2013 11:19 AM, Craig Howland wrote:
> >>On 11/25/2013 11:45 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >>>On 11/25/2013 10:41 AM, Howland Craig D (Craig) wrote:
> >>>So change "restrict<[s]>" to "restrict <[s]>"?
> >>Yes.
> >>>If that's the pattern, grep says iconv.c also needs fixing.
> >>>
> >>>If you can confirm that, I will fix those instances.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Yes, iconv.c also needs to be tweaked (I missed that one earlier). (The
> >>"<[string]>" construct ends up making "string" bold in the PDF version of the
> >>manual, but no other alteration.  So, for example, "char *restrict<[s]>,"
> >>becomes "char *restricts," instead of the desired "char *restrict s,".)
> >>
> >OK. I committed a fix for these as obvious.
> >
> >Now I want to double check that we said use "restrict" not
> >"__restrict" in the documentation section.
> As far as I'm concerned, it should be plain "restrict" in the
> documentation sections, because it is a standard keyword.

ACK.

> (The only
> question would be if we wanted a general comment in a boilerplate
> section that mentions restrict being subject to compiler support.)

Don't think so.  Information on C99 support is not the task of the
lib docs, it's the task of the compiler docs.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat

Attachment: pgp41obikcjZH.pgp
Description: PGP signature