On Sun, 26 Oct 2025, 16:15 Jonathan Wakely, <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2025, 15:37 Sandra Loosemore, <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> The "Option Summary" in the GCC documentation now runs 30+ pages in the
>> printed manual, and would be even longer if I added all the options
>> presently missing documentation.  Besides its length, there are no
>> direct links from the options it names, to their documentation -- only
>> to the containing section, many of which are also dozens of pages long.
>> (The alphabetical option index at the end of the manual does link
>> directly to the @opindex tag location in the detailed documentation.)
>> Nowadays hardly anybody uses a paper manual and can rely on the search
>> feature in their browser or PDF viewer to find what they're looking for
>> instead, so perhaps the lack of direct links isn't a fatal flaw, but
>> since the whole document is searchable, is the "Option Summary" still
>> helpful to point you in the right direction?  Do you find it useful?
>>
>> For some context: when I'm writing I like to have a clear purpose in
>> mind for each section of the document.  I'm having a hard time figuring
>> out what the purpose of the "Option Summary" is.  :-S  Maybe it made
>> sense 30+ years ago when GCC had many fewer options and most people
>> relied on a paper manual, but what about now?
>>
>
> I find it invaluable, it's usually where I go to first when looking
> something up in the online html pages. I don't know which of the many, many
> pages an option is on, so I go to the summary, search for the option, then
> click through to the relevant page and search again to get to the option.
>

I could do the same with the man page on my local machine, but that's just
a particular version, not trunk, and not older versions either. The online
docs cover every version, which is very useful for archaeology. And when
options have moved between sections (or aren't present at all in recent
versions) the summary page is how I find them.

Please don't suggest searching the info pages, I hate info as a doc browser
;-)


>
>

Reply via email to