From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4872 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2014 08:17:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 4857 invoked by uid 89); 7 Aug 2014 08:17:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f182.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f182.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f182.google.com) (209.85.192.182) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 08:17:52 +0000 Received: by mail-pd0-f182.google.com with SMTP id fp1so4783056pdb.41 for ; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 01:17:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.140.139 with SMTP id rg11mr16433641pdb.13.1407399470718; Thu, 07 Aug 2014 01:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org (CPE-58-160-155-134.oycza5.sa.bigpond.net.au. [58.160.155.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pz10sm3574207pbb.33.2014.08.07.01.17.49 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Aug 2014 01:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A9878EA33E5; Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:47:45 +0930 (CST) Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 08:17:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Doug Evans Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add typedefs for bfd_openr_iovec functions Message-ID: <20140807081745.GZ8921@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Doug Evans , binutils@sourceware.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 09:59:58AM -0700, Doug Evans wrote: > - I put the CODE_FRAGMENT in its own comment, not sure whether there > were any conventions to do otherwise. Let me know if/how you'd like > this done differently. Putting the typedefs in a CODE_FRAGMENT doesn't look very nice in opncls.texi or bfd.info. I believe they would be best placed in the synopsis of bfd_openr_iovec, and without comments. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM