Ulf M�ller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 11:25:44PM +0000, Dr Stephen Henson wrote:
>
> > Erm do we really want one manpage per function call or pair of calls?
>
> I think it's more readable this way (just like there's not just one
> man page for fopen/fprintf/fclose/fseek etc). Of course when there are
> lots of functions of essentially the same type, one page is sufficient.
>
But there is one page for things like dbm. I suppose you can find
examples of both kinds.
perlfunc from Perl is an extreme example.
> But if we're going to describe all the RSA stuff in one file, we need
> some other format than a manpage.
Well I was thinking that lots of the functions will have essentially one
line descriptions and having a complete manpage for something like
RSA_size() is IMHO overkill.
On a related issue IMHO we shouldn't document every function in the
library. Certain ones should be "internal only" paricularly if they are
of little use to the outside user or which users shouldn't be calling
anyway. Which ones don't get documented is largely a matter of opinion
but I'd place RSA_padding_add_PKCS1_type_1() into this category.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk/
Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior crypto engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Core developer of the OpenSSL project: http://www.openssl.org/
Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: via homepage.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
