This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch,doc] Clarify role of -fdollar-ok vs. IMPLICIT statements
But does so by removing the clarification attempt that I put in for
PR39670
less than a month ago :)
Oops, sorry. I saw the justification and thought it was a bit overkill
for a manual. Now I guess it was proved to be really needed :)
What about the following?
Index: invoke.texi
===================================================================
--- invoke.texi (revision 147057)
+++ invoke.texi (working copy)
@@ -256,9 +256,10 @@
@cindex $
@cindex symbol names
@cindex character set
-Allow @samp{$} as a valid non-first character in a symbol name. Symbols
+Allow @samp{$} as a valid non-first character in a symbol name. Symbols
that start with @samp{$} are rejected since it is unclear which
rules to
apply to implicit typing as different vendors implement different
rules.
+Using @samp{$} in @code{IMPLICIT} statements is also rejected.
@item -fbackslash
@opindex @code{backslash}
Please commit if OK.
Thanks,
FX