discuss@mandoc.bsd.lv
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kristaps Dzonsons <kristaps@bsd.lv>
To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv
Subject: Re: Opinions on .Dd?
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:56:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C4DA22A.9020905@bsd.lv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100726145018.GD24722@bramka.kerhand.co.uk>

>> Second thought: a manual date is in general ambiguous.  What does it
>> mean?  Last edit time?  Last checkin?  And what does it matter,
>> considering it usually can't be corroborated with corresponding binary
>> (or whatever)?
>>
> 
> yes, one of the original problems was that you could never be sure what
> the date related to. some said it was for when the page was created
> (which i felt was useless), others that it got bumped only on
> "significant" updates, and so on.
> 
>> So I dug around and found that `Dd' accepts no arguments.  It prints
>> "Epoch" in place of a date (wtf?).  I think an empty `Dd' is less
>> ambiguous than a bogus date.  (I'm now committing a fix to the effect
>> that `Dd' can be empty.)
>>
> 
> what do you mean it accepts no arguments? it accepts the date. and does
> it really print "Epoch"? i thought if you messed the date up it just
> printed the current date. maybe i am wrong about that though.

Yes:

% cat foo.3
.Dd
.Dt FOO 1
.Os
.Sh NAME
.Nm foo
.Nd bar
.Sh DESCRIPTION
Moo.
% nroff -mandoc foo.3
FOO(1)             BSD General Commands Manual            FOO(1)

NAME
     foo - bar

DESCRIPTION
     Moo.

BSD                           Epoch                          BSD

(Note groff output chopped, as they don't have our awesome -Owidth
argument.)  This is on GNU/Linux (groff 1.18.1).  I also tested on
OpenBSD and NetBSD.  Same.

If you enter an invalid string, say, `.Dd urgle', then you get the
current date.

> even so, i think it would be great to print "Epoch". there is no
> difference between "Epoch" and "", except a little humour.

I actually think it's a bug.

What I was getting at, regarding (e.g.) DFBSD and what to put in the
`Dd' field, is maybe they're best off leaving it blank.

>> I'm happy with putting some notes to the extent of "Usage of the `Dd'
>> field is usually one of convention" and listing that OpenBSD exclusively
>> uses $Mdocdate$, whilst a general-purpose manual should use a hard-coded
>> or empty date.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
> 
> this ties in with how do we handle OS differences... different pages, or
> a single page which notes differences. the latter might seem sane, but
> it could make the page unwieldy.

Single page, I think.  Are there really so many differences?

Thanks,

Kristaps
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv

  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-26 14:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-25  4:30 Sascha Wildner
2010-07-25  6:25 ` Ingo Schwarze
2010-07-25 12:08   ` Sascha Wildner
2010-07-26 13:42     ` Kristaps Dzonsons
2010-07-26 14:50       ` Jason McIntyre
2010-07-26 14:56         ` Kristaps Dzonsons [this message]
2010-07-26 15:06           ` Jason McIntyre
2010-07-25  8:37 ` Jason McIntyre

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4C4DA22A.9020905@bsd.lv \
    --to=kristaps@bsd.lv \
    --cc=discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).