This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC with formal testing docs


DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com> writes:

> Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> writes:
> > tm.texi does not require that NO_REGS == 0,
> 
> Um, yes?  Unless you're assuming that the user could do NO_REGS=5 or
> something in the enum, so that the enum starts with something other
> than zero?  If that's what you're thinking, perhaps we should change
> tm.texi to clarify that you shouldn't do that, but IMHO the
> documentation implies that NO_REGS==0.
> 
>  @deftp {Data type} {enum reg_class}
>  An enumerated type that must be defined with all the register class names
>  as enumerated values.  @code{NO_REGS} must be first.  @code{ALL_REGS}
>  must be the last register class, followed by one more enumerated value,
>  @code{LIM_REG_CLASSES}, which is not a register class but rather
>  tells how many classes there are.
> 
> Perhaps we could add ", and no numerical overrides" to the end of the
> first sentence?

Oh, sorry, I missed that bit of the docs.  I stopped at the definition
of NO_REGS, which is earlier in tm.texi.  I think we are OK.  Thanks.

Ian


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]