> On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 12:34:33AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
>
> > > <void/> is wrong.
> >
> > Why? See the docbook documentation:
> > > Void -- An empty element in a function synopsis indicating that the
> > function in question takes no arguments
>
> I know the DocBook probably better then you.
I'm sorry, I was only trying to support my view with external arguments, I
was _not_ implying that you didn't know the DocBook. (I admit - I needed to
look it up :-)
But why is <void/> wrong then?
> > > > See min() for example, mixed is not appropriate there.
>
> min()s is correct, exept the missing brackets for the optional arguments.
Which are optional? I looked into the source, and either 1 argument (array)
is accepted, or 2+ arguments, which are supposed to be numbers. IMHO, this
is currently reflected well.
> > > Simply make it two is IMHO nonsense. But we can agree if there is a
"!"
> > > separator between the arguments, with no spaces between the separator.
> >
> > This rates quite high on the WTF-scale... Have you seen how it is
rendered
> > anyway? There are two possible syntaxes for that min() function, and
they
> > should both be named. It isn't for nothing that there are multiple
> > prototypes allowed in XML, within one funcsynopsis. Again, see the
> > docbook-docs.
>
> I render or validate the PHP docs daily. So I don't see your problem.
I must have been unclear in my wordings, I wanted to say: don't you think
that the min() syntax is currently better reflected in the docs than it was
before?
> Multiple prototypes are posible with Hartmut's patch.
And doesn't the fact that multiple prototypes are supported (they are now -
I don't know which patch you're talking about?), mean that they should be
used when appropriate?
> -Egon
Jeroen
