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: Error in GCC documentation page

From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>, Trevor Smedley <trevor dot smedley at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 04:07:27 +0100
Subject: Re: Error in GCC documentation page
References: <ED143668-9DBB-4477-8561-4BC60C4652DA@gmail.com> <4C34C386.3000403@oracle.com> <AANLkTinxQ_WU-mchLwyNYLiqJ9-ewMgYLQPinxeJ2Gra@mail.gmail.com>

On 07/07/2010 23:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 7 July 2010 19:12, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>> On 07/07/2010 08:02 PM, Trevor Smedley wrote:
>>> On the page http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Other-Builtins.html the term "integral" is used twice in the section " Built-in Function: long __builtin_expect (long exp, long c)", where what is intended is "integer".
>>>
>> I'm not a native English speaker, and would like to know more about that
>> use, but can't be *that* bad if you can find it also in the ISO C++
>> Standard ;)
> 
> The usage is correct in "standardese" and English.
> My dictionary gives one definition of "integral" as "denoting a number
> that is an integer".

  OTOH, the more common everyday meaning of "integral" is "built-in".  Which
in the context might be a little confusing! :)

    cheers,
      DaveK

References:
- Error in GCC documentation page
  - From: Trevor Smedley
- Re: Error in GCC documentation page
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: Error in GCC documentation page
  - From: Jonathan Wakely

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