On Thu 08 Feb 2024 at 23:59:24 -0500, Mouse wrote: > I'm writing a manpage for a library and want to describe a function > which returns a pointer to a function. signal(3) has a similar case, right? And it spells out the type in full. So you could look there for inspiration. However I would prefer that it would make a typedef for the signal handler type, and use that both as argument for signal() and its return type: it us much more readable. For your case that would be true as well. > Specifically, it takes a handler of type void (*)(const char *, int) > and returns the previous handler. If we call it foo, then: typedef void (*handler_t)(const char *, int); > extern void (*foo(void (*)(const char *, int)))(const char *, int); extern handler_t foo(handler_t); > How should this be described in SYNOPSIS? The .Ft/.Fn paradigm does > not seem to me to have any obvious way to describe function return > types that aren't textually entirely before the function name, that is, > which don't fit the textual paradigm $RETURNTYPE $FUNCTIONNAME($ARGS). With this rephrasing it should fit better. -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert <rhialto/at/falu.nl> \X/ There is no AI. There is just someone else's work. --I. Rose
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature