Hi Stephen,
On 1/7/22 17:46, Stephen Kitt wrote:
The example program is obsolete, as indicate in the text, and
shouldn't be analysed. Changing the introductory heading to "Obsolete
program source" excludes it from automated analysis and makes it
hopefully clearer to readers that it is obsolete.
In this case, the first paragraph of the DESCRIPTION already notes that
the whole page is obsolete (and even removed from glibc). On top of
that, I plan to add the [[deprecated]] attribute to the function
prototype in the SYNOPSIS (when Michael comes back).
Do you think it's still necessary to mark the example program obsolete?
For a human reader, I'd say no.
For the automated analysis, I'd first decide on which format we want to
standardize to mark code begin and code end, and after that fix this if
it needs to be fixed.
Thanks,
Alex
Signed-off-by: Stephen Kitt <steve@xxxxxxx>
---
man3/matherr.3 | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/man3/matherr.3 b/man3/matherr.3
index 64bfa482a..e9d77d02c 100644
--- a/man3/matherr.3
+++ b/man3/matherr.3
@@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ matherr SING exception in log() function
x=12345.000000
.EE
.in
-.SS Program source
+.SS Obsolete program source
\&
.EX
#define _SVID_SOURCE
--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/
