Hi Paul, On 2020-10-01 19:32, Paul Eggert wrote: > If you're going to document this at all, I suggest documenting 'void' as > well as 'void *', and putting both sets of documentation into the same > man page. > All the types we're documenting are in the same page: system_data_types(7). And then we have links with the name of each type. And yes, I also pretend to document 'void'. > For 'void *' you should also mention that one cannot use arithmetic on > void * pointers, so they're special in that way too. Good suggestion! > Also, you should > warn that because one can convert from any pointer type to void * and > then to any other pointer type, it's a deliberate hole in C's > type-checking. Also good. I'll talk about generic function parameters for this. > It might not also hurt to mention 'void const *', 'void > volatile *', 'void const volatile *', etc. Those are qualifiers for the type, and I don't see how any of them would apply differently to 'void *' than to any other pointer type (or any type at all), so I think they don't belong to system_data_types(7). However, it might be good that someone starts a page called 'type_qualifiers(7)' or something like that. I would love that someone documents 'volatile' correctly, as there aren't many good sources about it. If someone who knows when to use --and especially when not to use-- 'volatile', is reading this, think about it :-) I still wonder if I used it correctly in the few cases I've had to. BTW, I'll CC the LKML. > > For 'void' you can mention the usual things, such as functions returning > void, and functions declared with (void) parameters, why one would want > to cast to (void), and so forth. Yes, I was thinking about that. > > You're starting to document the C language here, and if you're going to > do that you might as well do it right. I'm trying to do so :) Thanks, Alex
