Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 09:25:39 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Making entries in the function index of libc.tex
In-Reply-To: <200007122051.WAA24993@father.ludd.luth.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000713092415.12595C-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Martin Str|mberg wrote:

> > Why would you want to do that, in this single case, anyway?  There are
> > quite a few other functions that are documented as a family: spawn*,
> > _far*, to name a few.
> 
> It's a little worse for *rand48 than for e. g. spawn*: the wildcard is
> in the front. If you're looking for "spawnl", your are looking at
> "spawn<something>" and you'll quickly find "spawn*", whereas if you're
> looking for erand48, you'll be looking at "endpwent" and "errno", not
> finding "rand48".

Then how about changing the name of the node to something like this:

  @node rand48 family, random number

I'm assuming that people are likely to look for "rand48" most of the 
time.

(This thread confirms, once again, my firm belief that we should add
an index to libc.info.  Any takers?)