Rob Pierce([email protected]) on 2018.08.02 14:26:54 +0000: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 03:15:14PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:58:38PM +0000, Rob Pierce wrote: > > > A little less wordy when introducing the namieidata structure. > > > > > > Ok? > > > > > > Index: namei.9 > > > =================================================================== > > > RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man9/namei.9,v > > > retrieving revision 1.18 > > > diff -u -p -r1.18 namei.9 > > > --- namei.9 23 Nov 2015 17:53:57 -0000 1.18 > > > +++ namei.9 2 Aug 2018 13:51:43 -0000 > > > @@ -67,10 +67,9 @@ for name-to-inode conversion, in the day > > > .Xr vfs 9 > > > interface was implemented. > > > .Pp > > > -The arguments passed to the functions are encapsulated in the > > > +Arguments passed to these functions are encapsulated in the following > > > .Em nameidata > > > -structure. > > > -It has the following structure: > > > +structure: > > > .Bd -literal > > > struct nameidata { > > > /* > > > > > > > hi. > > > > i'm not sure it's a big win - it's just another way of saying the same > > thing. but now it can be interpreted to mean that there are more than one > > type of namei structure. > > > > the use of "structure" twice isn;t ideal though, i agree. > > > > jmc > > I agree, this is not a big win, but when I read four instances of "the" and > two > instances of "structure" in two sentence where one would do, I start to lose > focus. I don't see how this could be misinterpreted, but maybe I am missing > something.
One could even drop the .Em nameidata because the name of the structure is given just below. And the functions signatures have struct nameidata *ndp, so there is no reason to think there might be some other...
