This is the mail archive of the 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: gengtype: fix output_code_enum.

Basile Starynkevitch <> writes:

> However, I am curious.  Why is it wrong to make a link to something
> under  For bugs with a PR, there is a number which is
> logically such a link.

The ChangeLog says what has changed, it does not say why it has changed.
If it is necessary to say why something has changed, the place for that
is in a comment in the code.

You are right that the bug numbers in the ChangeLog entries are an
exception.  They are there to cause the patch to be automatically added
to the bug report.

You may, if you like, present an argument for why we should have the
ChangeLog file link to the mailing list.  But then we should do it for
pretty much every change, not just yours.  Unless and until we make that
general change, you should follow the existing conventions.

Of course, these days, with use of source code control and fast search
of code repositories, it's not clear that we need a the current format
of the ChangeLog file at all.


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