Date:	Sat, 21 Jun 2003 19:15:43 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<2427-Sat21Jun2003191543+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to:	<200306211445.h5LEjleO010415@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
	(ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se)
Subject:	Re: fpclassify
References:	<200306211445 DOT h5LEjleO010415 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 16:45:47 +0200 (CEST)
> > 
> > > Note that I kept __attribute((const)) in the texinfo file.
> > 
> > I'm not sure that's a good idea; I'm afraid it will confuse users.
> > Can you tell why you decided to keep it?
> 
> Well. My thinking was full information is better than lack of
> it. Cf. the recent discussion about abort().

If it is important to explain that `abort' is declared
`__attribute__((noreturn)', we should tell that in plain English (as
in ``this function never returns)''---as we already do for `abort'.
If it is important to show the const attribute, I think we should
explain that in plain English as well.

> > > +@ignore
> > > + * File fpclassl.txh.
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2003 Martin Str@"omberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>.
> > > + *
> > > + * This software may be used freely so long as this copyright notice is
> > > + * left intact. There is no warranty on this software.
> > > + *
> > > +@end ignore
> > 
> > Something for DJ to decide: since documentation is not ``software'',
> > I'd say this text is not entirely appropriate in a .txh file.
> 
> The documentation is part of the software I provide. I worked on this.

I meant specifically the words "This software".  The problem is that
``this'' is _not_ software, it's a documentation.

However, IANAL.

- Raw text -