Re: Documentation generation patch [Take 2]

["Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>]

On Fri, 11 May 2001, Mark Mitchell wrote:

> For now, I suggest just incorporating c-tree.texi as a sibling of
> rtl.texi.  Just put it right above RTL in the menu, and call it:
> 
>   Trees: The intermediate representation used by the C and C++ 
>          front-ends.
> 
> (At some point, we need to document the other languages too.)
> 
> That will get this information into the manual, and doesn't really
> commit us to any particular long-term organizational scheme.

One thing that might also make sense - which would make adding other
versions of the manual easier without commiting to any particular scheme -
would be to move most of the text within gcc.texi to separate files, so
gcc.texi does nothing much other than include the individual chapters.  
The only thing to watch out for here is that there are some deliberate
differences between mainline and branch gcc.texi.

That is, there might be files

languages.texi (for the part discussing languages GCC supports and
language standards).

trouble.texi (for "Known Causes of Trouble with GCC" (quite a bit of which 
is probably obsolete)).

support.texi (for the bug reporting instructions, except that the online 
ones obsolete them, the references on how to get help, and the references 
on contributing to GCC).

vms.texi (for the information on using GCC on VMS, though this could be 
obsolete - I presume the GNAT people working on VMS support will update or 
remove this information as appropriate).

make.texi (for the documentation of makefile targets, testsuite, etc.).

port.texi (for the documentation of GCC's portability and the ABIs it 
uses).

passes.texi (for the documentation of compiler passes).

config.texi (for the documentation of configuration fragments).

funding.texi

gnulinux.texi

gpl.texi (which could then, with the right -I options, be included by the 
other manuals that currently have their own copies of the GPL).

There could be more, one for each chapter, if you can think of appropriate
names, though some would be quite small.

And, probably the libstdc++-v3 porting manual should be part of the main
porting manual (with, then, a more specific name than porting.texi).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk