This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: More uses of "fatal"
- To: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
- Subject: Re: More uses of "fatal"
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 11:26:10 +0000
- cc: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Organization: ARM Ltd.
- Reply-To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 09:52:09AM -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
> > That's as may be, but while we're there already :-), can you maybe
> > document the existing categories / function calls? Say I'm adding
> > code and want the compiler to choke; how do I know which "fatal"
> > function to use?
> >
> > That's in the documentation in front of each routine in diagnostic.c.
> > Can you suggest a place to put the overview?
>
> Given the lack of a GCC Developer's Manual, how does the top of diagnostic.h
> sound to you?
>
Java has the concept of a documentation comment, which just happens to be
/** ... */
If we adopted this (or something similar) as a convention in gcc, and then
put .texi information in such comments in the header files we could soon
have a developers manual which was largely auto-generated.
R.