On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@s-opensource.com> wrote:
> Markus,
>
> Em Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:56:01 +0200
> Markus Heiser <markus.hei...@darmarit.de> escreveu:
>
>> Am 21.08.2016 um 14:11 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab
>> <mche...@s-opensource.com>:
>>
>> > Right now, for a struct, kernel-doc produces the following output:
>> >
>> > .. c:type:: struct v4l2_prio_state
>> >
>> > stores the priority states
>> >
>> > **Definition**
>> >
>> > ::
>> >
>> > struct v4l2_prio_state {
>> > atomic_t prios[4];
>> > };
>> >
>> > **Members**
>> >
>> > ``atomic_t prios[4]``
>> > array with elements to store the array priorities
>> >
>> > Putting a member name in verbatim and adding a continuation line
>> > causes the LaTeX output to generate something like:
>> > item[atomic_t prios\[4\]] array with elements to store the array
>> > priorities
>>
>>
>> Right now, the description of C-struct members is a simple
>> rest-definition-list
>> (not in the c-domain). It might be better to use the c-domain for members:
>>
>> http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/domains.html#directive-c:member
>>
>> But this is not the only thing we have to consider. To make a valid C-struct
>> description (with targets/references in the c-domain) we need a more
>> *structured* reST markup where the members are described in the block-content
>> of the struct directive. E.g:
>>
>> <SNIP> -----------
>> |.. c:type:: struct v4l2_subdev_ir_ops
>> |
>> | operations for IR subdevices
>> |
>> | .. c:member:: int (* rx_read) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t
>> count,ssize_t *num)
>> |
>> <SNIP> -----------
>>
>> By this small example, you see, that we have to discuss the whole markup
>> produced by the kernel-doc script (function arguments, unions etc.).
>> IMHO, since kernel-doc is widely used, this should be a RFC.
>
> I tried using c:member. It won't work on LaTeX output, as it will
> still put everything into a LaTeX item, with doesn't do line breaks.
I've tried c:member before, and I'm not convinced it buys us anything
useful. I'm also not convinced we'd need more structured rst markup
within struct or function descriptions in addition to what we currently
have. Keep it simple.
BR,
Jani.
>
> Also, according to Sphinx manual at
> http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/domains.html
> The syntax is:
>
> .. c:member:: type name
>
> Describes a C struct member. Example signature:
>
> .. c:member:: PyObject* PyTypeObject.tp_bases
>
> So, it expects <type> <member> as arguments. If the manual is right, it
> would be expecting, instead, the weird syntax:
>
> .. c:member:: int (*) (struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf, size_t
> count,ssize_t *num) rx_read
>
> With hurts my eyes.
>
> As I guess we don't want to maintain ourselves a LaTeX output Sphinx
> plugin forked from upstream, I guess that a more definitive solution
> would involve overriding the parser for c:member in a way that it would
> produce an output like the one in this path, while creating the proper
> c domain reference for the structure member inside the C domain.
>
> Regards,
> Mauro
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
