Re: [PATCH] Revised^2 gcc.texi passes documentation update

[Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>]

"Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> writes:

> On 12 Jun 2001, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> 
>> Should I submit it, or does no one care about stuff like
>> that?
>> I always see them in compiler books and docs for other ocmpilers, so i
>> figured i'd make one for gcc.
> 
> A standalone figure seems fine.  One as part of the manual would need to
> be mainline only, I'd think, as you'd need to handle Makefile
> dependencies, work out what derived forms should be included in the
> distribution for conversion to dvi / HTML to work without needing transfig
> installed and whether having transfig would become a requirement for
> building docs from CVS, make sure the figures were included in the files
> update_web_docs copies to onlinedocs, etc..

This is the problem I foresaw too. 
> 
>> + @c Err, when we have cpplib docs, point the person there.
> 
> There's always cppinternals.texi.

It was kinda lame when I first started, it's been improved somewhat
since then.  I'll add a pointer to it.

> 
>> + @cindex inline on trees, automatic
>> + Currently, the main optimization performed here is tree-based
>> + inlining.  
> 
> Again, reference the appropriate source files here?

I could have sworn I had cp/optimize.c there.

> 
>> + @cindex constant folding
>> + @cindex arithmetic simplifications
>> + @cindex simplifications, arithmetic
>> + Constant folding and some arithmetic simplifications are also done
>> + during this pass, on the tree representation.
> 
> Reference source files?
And fold-const.c here.

Hmmmm.

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

-- 
"One time I went to a museum where all the work in the museum had
been done by children.  They had all the paintings up on
refrigerators.
"-Steven Wright