This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: doc maintainer questions
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: David Wohlferd <dw at LimeGreenSocks dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:36:47 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: doc maintainer questions
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5675B571.5010005@LimeGreenSocks.com>
[ Old e-mail alert ]
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, David Wohlferd wrote:
> I have been discussing adding some content to the basic asm docs. As part of
> this work, I want to add a discussion of "How to convert basic asm to extended
> asm." However it doesn't seem like this is a good fit for the User Guide.
> This is both because the UG doesn't generally talk about "How To" write code,
> and because the text may need updates more often than the UG gets released.
For the latter, could referring to gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs (in particular
the trunk version there) be a viable option?
That gets updated daily, so not a question of waiting for the next
> 1) Is it appropriate for the UG to link to sections in the wiki? I
> see that we do, but should we?
Generally, I think that is fine. It does require Internet access
and you run into the opposite of what you describe above (the Wiki
might have moved to coverage of a later version of GCC), but then
so does what I described at the beginning of this message.
Generally, I also think that we should not spread things across too
many places, and our documentation should be mostly self contained.
(The particular use case you had in mind, seems fine for the Wiki
or the web pages -- and I'm thinking of our porting_to.html pages
that we have had for the last couple of major releases.)