"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:3e563e0a@news.povray.org...
> Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> >> (For example, how would you categorize the trace() function?)
>
> > "Other"
>
>   Very logical naming? When you want to consult the documentation to
> see what was the syntax of that function, you immediately can deduce
> by logic that this function is of type "other"? (How do you deduce

IMHO a less binary approach would be best - the general convention of
catagorising by return seems good, but in the case of, e.g., strlen, it should
appear in both catagories.

IMHO the manual would benefit from more redundancies based on workflow and
common-sense - though I hasten to add that this is largely a criticism of human
beings rather than the manual.

Post a reply to this message