Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 10 May 2018 13:42:58 -0300
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/18] wait: wait.h: Get rid of a kernel-doc/Sphinx
 warnings
Message-ID: <20180510134249.64445281@vento.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20180510093846.184f6de0@lwn.net>
References: <cover.1525684985.git.mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
        <6b9b3184cbfabab1ad89c974ddf1c61631e8f1bf.1525684985.git.mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
        <20180510083838.GA21846@infradead.org>
        <20180510063805.1859b1aa@vento.lan>
        <20180510073012.5902088e@lwn.net>
        <20180510112113.4db65764@vento.lan>
        <20180510093846.184f6de0@lwn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Em Thu, 10 May 2018 09:38:46 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> escreveu:

> On Thu, 10 May 2018 11:21:13 -0300
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > The problem with a hint-based mechanism is that it will generate
> > false hints. If added, we may end by needing to add extra tags to
> > disable the hints mechanism where it gets wrong, or to periodically
> > do code changes at kernel-doc comments in order to make the hints
> > logic happy.
> > 
> > So, IMO, we should provide non-hints based mechanism, like forcing the
> > string that prepends the colon to have a keyword that will make it to
> > parse the block as literal, where expressions like:
> > 
> > 	See the code-block foo:
> > 	See the following code example:
> > 	See the following flow diagram:
> > 	See the following artwork:
> > 
> > Is the best alternative to avoid "::", as on the enclosed patch.  
> 
> But this, too, is a hint-based mechanism.  Thanks for the patches, I'll
> keep them around, but I would like an opportunity to try to do better
> before applying them.  I fear that using magic words in this way will
> lead to a constant stream of surprises, and I'd like to avoid that if
> possible...

Yes, it is still hint-based. A careful selection of the "magic spell
words/phrases" would minimize the risks of false positives, but it
could still lead into some unwanted surprises.

IMO, "::" (or some other character combination that is not used
elsewhere) is still the safest option.


Thanks,
Mauro