> Am 25.09.2017 um 20:41 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> + $cont = 1;
>>> + };
>>> + };
>>> + # Ignore other nested elements, like enums
>>> + $members =~ s/({[^\{\}]*})//g;
>>> + $nested = $decl_type;
>>
>> What is the latter good for? I guess the 'nested' trick to suppress
>> such 'excess' warnings from nested types is no longer needed .. right?
>
> For things like:
>
> enum { foo, bar } type;
>
> Granted, a good documentation should also describe "foo" and "bar",
> but that could be easily done by moving enums out of the struct, or
> by add descriptions for "foo" and "bar" at @type: markup.
Hm .. I suppose you are misunderstanding me. I didn't asked about
$members, I asked about $nested. There is only one place where
$nested is used, and this is in the check_sections function ...
@@ -2531,9 +2527,7 @@ sub check_sections($$$$$$) {
} else {
- if ($nested !~ m/\Q$sects[$sx]\E/) {
- print STDERR "${file}:$.: warning: " .
- "Excess struct/union/enum/typedef member " .
- "'$sects[$sx]' " .
- "description in '$decl_name'\n";
- ++$warnings;
- }
+ print STDERR "${file}:$.: warning: " .
+ "Excess struct/union/enum/typedef member " .
+ "'$sects[$sx]' " .
+ "description in '$decl_name'\n";
+ ++$warnings;
}
Since this is the only place where $nested is use, we can drop all
the occurrence of $nested in the kernel-doc script .. or I'am
totally wrong?
-- Markus --
