Return-Path: Message-ID: <474FD172.3090109@free.fr> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:01:38 +0100 From: Fabien Chevalier MIME-Version: 1.0 To: BlueZ development References: <4749E9DB.3020801@free.fr> <1196056051.4217.51.camel@aeonflux> <474AF05D.70404@free.fr> <1196196897.17196.56.camel@aeonflux> In-Reply-To: <1196196897.17196.56.camel@aeonflux> Cc: Johan Hedberg Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] [PATCH] Bluez exceptions refactoring updated patch Reply-To: BlueZ development List-Id: BlueZ development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Hi Marcel, > > and the origin is from the other error.[ch] files. So the copyright > still prevails. Copying content from one file to another one doesn't > change the copyright. If this is the case i should have a couple of copyrights in the pcm_bluetooth and ctl_bluetooth files, as if i remember well they both started as a copy& past from plugz project ;-) I will surely send a patch to fix that one of those days. > >>> It is great that you added comments for each function, but they belong >>> inside the *.c files. The rule is that they should be placed where the >>> actual function body is defined. >> Marcel, i don't know where from you got this idea, but i find it pretty >> dumb. The whole point in having the documentation in the header file is >> that as a user of a function you're not interested in how it works (the >> c file), but what it does, which is what the documentation is for. >> >> I don't know of *any* project that has it's function level documentation >> in the C files. >> But there are numerous counter-examples: >> - The Linux Kernel (have a look at the USB stack file >> include/linux/usb.h for instance). > > And check drivers/usb/core/urb.c for another example. The documentation > comment are not for reading the *.h. They are for creating automated API > documentation. The that structs are document in the header file is > right, because they are defined there. The actual function are defined > in the *.c files and thus the comment belongs there. > If you wish to follow kernel documenting style, then so be it. We're clearly sitting in the minority side however ;-) Cheers, Fabien ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ Bluez-devel mailing list Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel