This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [RFA/C] Break out C options into a separate file


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

> It can never require changing only one place - you need to implement what 
> the option is meant to do as well.  All generated Texinfo docs still need 
> to be checked into CVS (e.g. f/intdoc.texi, gnat_ug_*.texi) for use in 
> onlinedocs generation (so that doesn't require configuring and building 
> the compiler).  Where one file contains both documentation for the manual 
> and code for the compiler, it probably also needs GPL/GFDL dual licensing.  
> (And you need appropriate coding to get the options in the right order in 
> the output Texinfo file.)  But it would be good if it were impossible to 
> have an option supported at all without nonempty Texinfo documentation.

I'm wondering how practical it would be to mark up invoke.texi and
generate the options parser from that.  This would also need a way
for extra languages to inject text into the manual, but we ought to
have that anyway.

zw


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