Re: [PATCH 4/4] trace2 docs: clarify what `varargs` is all about
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Mar 10, 2022, 14:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <220310.86ee39kh0v.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <2eecea50e5132b09574451f37ca76a5d4af8697f.1646919331.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 10 2022, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> > --- > Documentation/technical/api-trace2.txt | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/technical/api-trace2.txt b/Documentation/technical/api-trace2.txt > index 285f713ed84..91985512867 100644 > --- a/Documentation/technical/api-trace2.txt > +++ b/Documentation/technical/api-trace2.txt > @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ Some functions have a `_va_fl()` suffix to indicate that they also > take a `va_list` argument. > > Some functions have a `_printf_fl()` suffix to indicate that they also > -take a varargs argument. > +take a `printf()` style format with a variable number of arguments.
This is correct, but I think better would be to explicitly describe the _printf_va_fl() suffix in this list, i.e. now that implicitly falls under _va_fl(), so it's *technically* redundant.
But either describing it explicitly, or saying that `_printf_*_fl()` are function that take a printf format before either a "va_args" or "..." would make the end-state a bit more obvious.
I wonder if the pre-image wanted to describe `_printf_va_fl()` (which would make it correct), and we just omitted a `printf_fl()` description.