I was thinking, is there a way to have a new structure for the protos definitions ? As this commit shows it, the current system suffers from some lacks. We can't express the optional arguments as we want.
Agreed. But there is a relatively small number of functions where this
problem shows up. I don't think it's something anyone has to
particularly worry about -- having two protos for those special cases is
fine by me.
It is better to not reinvent the system but to add notes for these functions IMHO. But feel free to suggest some concrete solution, and we can see how that can be expressed in DocBook...
Goba