Re: Alphebetize manual

["Joseph S. Myers" <jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk>]

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Nathan Sidwell wrote:

> the list of machine dependent options is in a random order. This
> alphabetizes them, ok?

Alphabetizes in which order?  There are at least three possible: the
processor names used for the headings in invoke.texi (of which the choice
can be a bit arbitrary), the names used in target triplets (which suffer
from some processors having several entirely different names used in
target triplets) and the names of the directories under gcc/config (fixed
but arbitrary and not a part of the user interface).  The patch seems to
follow the first of these, which is reasonable as that's the one users see
in the manual, but the comment should explicitly state that this is what
the list is alphabetized by.

I suspect many of these lists of target options are incomplete, even
ignoring the many undocumented options hidden in specs.  I've never gone
through the lists of target options or specs for undocumented options
except for targets with no documentation of options at all (bug 5362, fr30
and i860 being the current targets with this problem though when i860 was
resurrected it was indicated that the target options were unimplemented
and would be removed
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-08/msg00571.html>).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)