On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> - Along those lines, is parse-header the right name for this thing? >>>> "Parsing" isn't necessarily the goal of somebody who uses this directive, >>>> right? They want to extract documentation information. Can we come up >>>> with a better name? >>> >>> Mauro, what is your suggestion and how would we go on in this topic? >> >> Maybe we could call it as: "include-c-code-block" or something similar. > > Hmm, that's not any better, IMHO ... there is a 'parsed-literal' so, what's > wrong with a 'parsed-header' directive or for my sake ' parse-c-header'. > IMHO it is very unspecific what this directive does and it might be changed in > the near future if someone (e.g. Daniel [1]) see more use cases then the one yet. > > [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media%40vger.kernel.org/msg101129.html I was wondering more whether we should uplift this to be the canonical way to document uapi headers. Then we could call it kernel-uapi-header or whatever, along the lines of our kernel-doc directive. But really this was just an idea, atm it's a media exclusive feature of our doc toolchain. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
