On 2/14/19 3:37 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 14:19 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 2/13/19 6:48 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
I'm sending patch where I document changes I made during GCC 9
development. I would appreciate both language and factical comments
about the patch.
Nothing technical, just a few very minor language nits/suggestions.
Martin
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html
index 13243c2..9fec9e2 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html
@@ -50,11 +50,64 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
<h2 id="general">General Improvements</h2>
<ul>
<li>
- A new option -flive-patching=[inline-only-static|inline-clone]
is
+ A new option
<code>-flive-patching=[inline-only-static|inline-clone]</code> is
s/is/has been/ would be better (and either a comma after option or
a definite article without the comma).
introduced to provide a safe compilation for live-patching. At
the
same
time, provides multiple-level control on the enabled IPA
optimizations.
See the user guide for further information about the option for
more
- details.
+ details.
Ideally we should add URLs any time we mention an option, linking to
the docs for that option. texinfo's HTML toolchain does give us per-
option anchors. They're not visible [1], but "View Source" shows us
that they do exist; in the form:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/SOMETHING.html#indexOPTION
though annoyingly the SOMETHING varies depending on what kind of option
it is.
The pertinent one here is:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-flive-patching
(FWIW, I have a patch for GCC 10 that emits terminal sequences to
"linkify" the output when diagnostics mention option names, adding a
URL to the docs for the pertinent option).
That sounds awesome!
Martin
[...snip...]
Dave
[1] I've emailed the texinfo project about this
