From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 67915 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2016 10:45:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 67899 invoked by uid 89); 30 Nov 2016 10:45:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=reconsider, H*r:sk:dhcp-19 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] manual: Add new header and standards annotations. To: Rical Jasan , Joseph Myers References: <20161123063807.14845-1-ricaljasan@pacific.net> <20161123063807.14845-4-ricaljasan@pacific.net> <64fa1a5a-4af3-5e3f-b192-e79203c3e328@pacific.net> <951c0013-8227-46c3-6d05-678bca61f2ce@pacific.net> Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Michael Kerrisk , "Carlos O'Donell" From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:45:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <951c0013-8227-46c3-6d05-678bca61f2ce@pacific.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg01088.txt.bz2 On 11/30/2016 11:39 AM, Rical Jasan wrote: > On 11/25/2016 06:53 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: >> Where the function description would then have: >> >> Preliminary: | MT-Safe | AS-Safe | AC-Safe | *Note POSIX Safety >> Concepts::. >> >> Standards: POSIX.1-2008 (unistd.h). *Note Feature Test Macros::. > > I like this. This is one of the avenues I was going to suggest, though > I wasn't sure how amenable everybody would be to more boilerplate in > *every single* description. Many programmers would also find annotations which glibc version introduced a particular functionality *extremely* useful, especially for functions that were added after glibc 2.5 or so. It's not a standard as such (but LSB would be), but I think it serves a similar purpose. Can we reconsider adding this kind of information to the manual? Thanks, Florian