This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] New libstdc++ docs on testing and library versioning
- From: Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely at redhat dot com>, <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 23:36:36 -0600
- Subject: Re: [patch] New libstdc++ docs on testing and library versioning
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160805003713.GW4264@redhat.com>
On 08/04/2016 06:37 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I've been working on some changes to the libstdc++ manual recently.
A lot of the changes are just using DocBook markup with more semantic
meaning (e.g. <option> or <filename> instead of using <code> for
everything that should use a monospace font) but there are some
changes to content too.
I've added a new subsection documenting the steps needed to bump the
library version when adding new symbols, and rewritten the section on
writing testcases. The main reason for the latter is to encourage the
use of { dg-do run { target c++11 } } rather than the { dg-options
"-std=gnu++11" } approach used until now. I've also started
documenting the libstdc++-specific dg-require-SUPPORT directives
available for our tests.
[snip]
I tried to look over this patch and my eyes started glazing over....
I suggest trying to separate the markup changes (possibly multiple
patches, for different kinds of changes) from the new content. From my
perspective, I think formatting cleanups and minor copy-editing can go
in under the obvious patch rule as long as you are satisfied with the
way it looks and have self-reviewed the patch to make sure you didn't
accidentally delete some chunk of text or introduce some other
unintended change.
The new material should be reviewed by someone knowledgeable enough to
catch problems with the content.
-Sandra