On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Jeff Pohlmeyer wrote:

> The man page's wording of:
> " a pointer to a char* "
> always seemed easy to misread for me, like it is mixing plain English with C
> code - if you explicitly refer to a pointer as a "pointer" then surely the
> asterisk must refer to a footnote or something?
>
> Maybe it would be clearer to call it:
> " a pointer to a char pointer "
> or:
> " a char** "

Agreed! I went the the upper alternative. Fix committed now. Thanks!

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se