[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Tags/concept mappings
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 11:46:50PM -0400 or thereabouts, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote: > Along this topic, does anyone have any policy papers or other > guides mapping specific C constructs to DocBook tags. I've been > inventing my own as I go, but it strikes me as something where > there may already be common conventions. I was really hoping someone would chip in here. I try to avoid marking up code, because I don't understand C too well, but occasionally I have been roped into it. Since at least effort ended up in a fairly widely- distributed package, I have been cringing ever since, thinking, "I hope I didn't mess that all up" :) > For some examples: Is a #define macro a <function>? Is a #define'd Yeah, I have met that one, too. I think I made the macros <function>s in the end. > value a <constant>? (seems it should be, but it might be a literal) > What is a pre-processor directive? Is a number or a quoted string a > literal or a contant? What are asm and volatile? What is a software > package name? (option, filename or productname?) > > I realize for most (if not all) of these the answer may be "Whatever > you think is best", but I am just curious if there is any cultural > convention which has been summarized somewhere. I guess what I want is > the reverse of Appendix G of TDG ;) I know the feeling! Telsa
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC