From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
To: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: DOCBOOK: RFE #473365: Allow optional in funcprototype
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 07:24:29 -0400
<funcprototype>
<funcdef>int <function>foo</function></funcdef>
<paramdef>int <parameter>bar</parameter></paramdef>
<optional>
<paramdef>int <parameter>baz</parameter></paramdef>
<paramdef>int <parameter>aaa</parameter></paramdef>
<optional>
<paramdef>int <parameter>bbb</parameter></paramdef>
<paramdef>int <parameter>ccc</parameter></paramdef>
</optional>
</optional>
</funcprototype>
I hadn't yet an occasion to use 'funcprototype', but I'm glad to see that
'type' was recently added to 'paramdef'. However, isn't a 'funcparam'
really a special-case of 'type'? Personally, I'm a bit unclear on why
'funcparam' even exists.