Am 22.08.2016 um 12:06 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Markus,
>
> Em Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:56:01 +0200
> Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
>
>> Am 21.08.2016 um 14:11 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>>> Right now, for a struct, kernel-doc produces the following output:
>>>
>>> .. c:type:: struct v4l2_prio_state
>>>
>>> stores the priority states
>>>
>>> **Definition**
>>>
>>> ::
>>>
>>> struct v4l2_prio_state {
>>> atomic_t prios[4];
>>> };
>>>
>>> **Members**
>>>
>>> ``atomic_t prios[4]``
>>> array with elements to store the array priorities
>>>
>>> Putting a member name in verbatim and adding a continuation line
>>> causes the LaTeX output to generate something like:
>>> item[atomic_t prios\[4\]] array with elements to store the array priorities
>>
>>
>> Right now, the description of C-struct members is a simple rest-definition-list
>> (not in the c-domain). It might be better to use the c-domain for members:
>>
>> http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/domains.html#directive-c:member
>>
>> But this is not the only thing we have to consider. To make a valid C-struct
>> description (with targets/references in the c-domain) we need a more
>> *structured* reST markup where the members are described in the block-content
>> of the struct directive. E.g:
>>
>> <SNIP> -----------
>> |.. c:type:: struct v4l2_subdev_ir_ops
>> |
>> | operations for IR subdevices
>> |
>> | .. c:member:: int (* rx_read) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t count,ssize_t *num)
>> |
>> <SNIP> -----------
>>
>> By this small example, you see, that we have to discuss the whole markup
>> produced by the kernel-doc script (function arguments, unions etc.).
>> IMHO, since kernel-doc is widely used, this should be a RFC.
>
> I tried using c:member. It won't work on LaTeX output, as it will
> still put everything into a LaTeX item, with doesn't do line breaks.
>
> Also, according to Sphinx manual at http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/domains.html
> The syntax is:
>
> .. c:member:: type name
>
> Describes a C struct member. Example signature:
>
> .. c:member:: PyObject* PyTypeObject.tp_bases
>
> So, it expects <type> <member> as arguments. If the manual is right, it
> would be expecting, instead, the weird syntax:
>
> .. c:member:: int (*) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t count,ssize_t *num) rx_read
>
> With hurts my eyes.
Argh, you are right ... but it is very confusing. I made a small test::
<SNIP> ------------
.. c:type:: struct v4l2_subdev_ir_ops_001
.. c:member:: int (*) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t count,ssize_t *num) rx_read
lorem ipsum
.. c:type:: struct v4l2_subdev_ir_ops_002
operations for IR subdevices
.. c:member:: int (* rx_read) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t count,ssize_t *num)
lorem ipsum
Test refs
=========
* :c:member:`v4l2_subdev_ir_ops_001.rx_read`
* :c:member:`v4l2_subdev_ir_ops_002.rx_read`
<SNIP> ------------
It seems, the c-parser is very dump, the v4l2_subdev_ir_ops_002.rx_read link
is closed, the 001 not ... a look at the sources:
* reg-exprs: https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/blob/master/sphinx/domains/c.py#L29
And the following snippet is all about handling signatures (of func, type, member .. directives)
m = c_funcptr_sig_re.match(sig)
if m is None:
m = c_sig_re.match(sig)
if m is None:
raise ValueError('no match')
rettype, name, arglist, const = m.groups()
In short: since the signature parsing is such worse, we can't predict
how type and name is parsed ... argh.
> As I guess we don't want to maintain ourselves a LaTeX output Sphinx
> plugin forked from upstream,
Agree
> I guess that a more definitive solution
> would involve overriding the parser for c:member in a way that it would
> produce an output like the one in this path, while creating the proper
> c domain reference for the structure member inside the C domain.
Summarized:
* The c-parser of the Sphinx c-domain, is worse. BTW this is the next
c-parser implementation used in the toolchain (parse-headers, kernel-doc)
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg101440.html
* Even if we use a member-directive in the block of a type directive,
it will nod be rendered well in the latex / pdf output.
OK, with this in mind, I agree with Jani ... "keep it simple" ;-)
-- Markus --
--
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
