https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68081
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey Walton <noloader at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #6) > This comment makes no sense (sorry, couldn't find a nice way to say it). > > > Intel builds software > > We are talking about gcc, not Intel software. Documentation is not fast or > slow. Yeah, I can understand how it can be confusing. One thing I know is Intel now documents some of the penalties for using AMD. The FTC required it in their settlement. How can we determine what applies, and what does not apply, from the various Intel docs? Maybe it would be better if GCC just documented things on its own, and stopped relying on outside documentation? > ... > I was never in favor of documenting those builtins, it makes people believe > that they can use them... I thought I was allowed to use documented functions; and I was not supposed to use undocumented ones. Yeah, this seems to be turned on its head :)
