Hi all,

On 7/3/23 23:35, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2023-07-03 11:16, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>>> -This format is employed in cases where only a single
>>> -feature test macro can be used to expose the function
>>> -declaration, and that macro is not defined by default.
>>> +This format is employed in cases where feature macros
>>> +expose the function declaration with the correct type,
>>> +and these macros are not defined by default.
>>
>> This isn't right. The shorthand format is sometimes used when there's 
>> no off(64)_t involved, e.g. in memfd_create(2).
> 
> Fair enough. Let's improve that wording to:
> 
> This format is employed when the feature test macros ensure that the 
> proper function declarations are visible, and the macros are not defined 
> by default.
> 
> Revised patch attached. If this wording is still not clear enough, 
> please feel free to suggest better wording.

Thanks for the v3 patch, Paul.  I like it.  Would you mind resending it
inline, to make it easier to quote-reply to it, in case anyone wants
to discuss anything?  Does anyone oppose to this patch, and wants to
propose an alternative patch?

Cheers,
Alex

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5