[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-libc-dev] Documentation/Lib mismatch for inverse( ) function in

From: Wouter van Gulik
Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Documentation/Lib mismatch for inverse( ) function in math lib?
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:08:45 +0200
User-agent: Opera M2/7.54 (Win32, build 3865)

I think there is a documentation flaw for the math lib.  The
documentation states there is function: double inverse(double ).

Hmm, I was not aware that this function was actually exported and
documented to be exported.  I recently renamed all supposedly internal
(to libm/FPlib) function entries to __fp_XXX names so they do not risk
a collision with the application's name space.  inverse() has thus
been renamed to __fp_inverse().

Aha, but by accident it was exported to documentation. That's clear for me now.

Well, if people think it has substantial value to be made publically
available, I could undo that particular change.

I don't know if it was available in earlier versions or that's a new feature/bug in this release. To me it looks like it is available from earlier versions. Especially since it's documented with an extra note stating it's not an official C function. I don't know DoxyGen (except the general idea) but I don't expect it to generate these notes.

The __ prepended to all function args is a rather unfortunate
side-effect of the way the documentation is generated.  As most of the
documentation is extracted by doxygen out of header files, we wanted
to avoid a collision with the application's name space (again).
Suppose the user has a macro like

Yeah, I understood the reason for defining the arguments __x
So I guessed that the missing __x was a result of a bug in the lib, therefore causing the documentation flaw.

So yes, this is a bug.  However, its resolution depends on whether we
are going to withdraw the function inverse() from public namespace
alltoghether or not.

Shall I fill in a bug report, so this issue will not be forgotten?

With kind regards,


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]