From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 6 09:00:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A44116A4CF for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:00:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C6443D48 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:00:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9690mTA025017 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:00:48 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i9690mr9025016; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:00:48 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:00:48 GMT Message-Id: <200410060900.i9690mr9025016@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org From: Giorgos Keramidas Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Giorgos Keramidas List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:00:48 -0000 The following reply was made to PR docs/72375; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/72375: prototype error in signal(3) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:53:41 +0300 On 2004-10-06 08:57, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > The prototype in signal(3) is misformatted somehow, but I don't > have enough mdoc clue to fix it: > > void (* > signal(int sig, void (*func)(int)))(int); Ruslan has added a comment above the mdoc source of signal.3 that reads like this: 45 .\" The following is Quite Ugly, but syntactically correct. 46 .\" Don't try to 47 .\" fix it. 48 .Ft void \*(lp* 49 .Fn signal "int sig" "void \*(lp*func\*(rp\*(lpint\*(rp\*(rp\*(rp\*(lpint" If Ruslan doesn't know of a better way to write this in mdoc, it's quite possible that there is none. One way to write the prototype without this strange output is with a typedef, as shown a few lines below in the same manpage ;-)