Re: [c] removing warnings on doc

On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:18:34PM +0100, Michèle Garoche wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,

 <snip what="information about patch"> 
> Two warnings remains, that I don't know how to solve:
> 
> WARNING: No declaration for: cong_document_get_dispspec_element
> WARNING: No declaration for: cong_editor_node_get_type
> 
> I'm unable to find where the first one is in the tree.
My wild gues: it changed into cong_document_get_dispspec_element_for_node
Dave? Nickolay?

> For the second one, it is defined in cong-editor-node.h line 39 as:
> #define CONG_EDITOR_NODE_TYPE (cong_editor_node_get_type())
> but that is the only reference that I've found to it.

But there are several references to CONG_EDITOR_NODE_TYPE

You have found, what is called a preprocessor macro.

> Now, apart from those two references, the result is as is:
> 814 symbols documented, 547 not documented, and 409 unused declarations.
> 
> I can try to add some unused declarations (the most obvious ones to me) 
> to the doc if it is wanted.


I have great respect for what you are doing. I can see that the numbers
of warnings and errors messages are reduced. I also see when
programm code could be get harmed. But I'm not in position to judge
that the programmers documentation is improving.

Yes, adding unused declarations to the doc is fine.


Cheers
Geert Stappers

_______________________________________________
Conglomerate-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.copyleft.no/mailman/listinfo/conglomerate-devel
[c]: in december will [conglomerate-devel][c] removed from the subject.
(filter on other headers then the subject line)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBshJYOSINbgwa/7sRAsXgAJ0e72/Mfp+Ge+YSkW9xiLsV9vrHzwCgu6uI
mWN5NQTX9/5O9Pnysu7HWG0=
=zCep
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----