Re: [DOCPATCH] change from opus: 3.3 and almost mainline

[James Morrison <ja2morri at csclub dot uwaterloo dot ca>]

> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 17:54:06 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, "Lisa M. Opus Goldstein" <opus@gnu.org>
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO version=2.20
> X-Spam-Level: 
> 
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, James Morrison wrote:
> > 2003-04-23  Lisa M. Opus Goldstein  <opus@gnu.org>
> >
> >         * doc/invoke.texi: Fixes to style, grammar and diction.
> 
> I had a look, and some of these changes really are very nice
> improvements!
> 
> Only about three of them, I am not sufficiently confident.
> 
> > -Names of template functions whose types involve @code{typename} or
> > -template template parameters can be mangled incorrectly.
> > +Template functions whose template parameters involve @code{typename} or
> > +@code{template} may have their names mangled incorrectly.
> 
> 
> >  @item -Wno-pmf-conversions @r{(C++ only)}
> >  @opindex Wno-pmf-conversions
> > -Disable the diagnostic for converting a bound pointer to member function
> > -to a plain pointer.
> > +Disable the diagnostic for a bound pointer to member function
> > +that is converted into a plain pointer.

 I think the two above are ok.

 
> >  during compilation.  Because these checks scan the method table only at
> >  the end of compilation, these warnings are not produced if the final
> > -stage of compilation is not reached, for example because an error is
> > -found during compilation, or because the @code{-fsyntax-only} option is
> > +stage of compilation is not reached (i.e., an error is
> > +found during compilation) or because the @code{-fsyntax-only} option is
> >  being used.
> 
> Transforming "for example" to "i.e." seems unsafe, in general.  Are you
> sure it is okay here?
 
 I agree this change seems incorrect.

> 
> > @@ -1839,8 +1839,8 @@
> >  below can be used to control the diagnostic messages formatting
> >  algorithm, e.g.@: how many characters per line, how often source location
> >  information should be reported.  Right now, only the C++ front end can
> > -honor these options.  However it is expected, in the near future, that
> > -the remaining front ends would be able to digest them correctly.
> > +honor these options.  However, it is expected in the near future that
> > +the remaining front ends will be able to digest them correctly.
> 
> How about: "However, we expect..."  (i.e., using active voice)?
> 
> 
> I'm very hesitant to apply the part above without explicit approval by a
> language frontend maintainer (or someone qualified like Joe or Fergus),
> but if you send a patch without these critical part, I will apply them
> right away.
> 
> Gerald

 I think would to will here is ok, since it's an expectation anyway.

 I'll create a patch without these changes and send it again.

Jim