This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 01/89] Const-correctness fixes for some gimple accessors
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 02:21:47 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/89] Const-correctness fixes for some gimple accessors
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1398099480-49147-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1398099480-49147-2-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <535566C6 dot 3020905 at redhat dot com> <1398118294 dot 26834 dot 80 dot camel at surprise>
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
> It was pointed out to me off-list that this patch series lacks
> documentation changes. I'm working on fixing that, though am not sure I
> want to fill everyone inboxes with an updated set of patches yet.
> Should I send a combined patch for the documentation changes? (I can
> break it up and merge it into the individual changes on commit, or if
> these need editing).
>
> In any case I fixed up the corresponding entries in gcc/doc/gimple.texi,
> double-checked the bootstrap/regtest/HTML generation of this one (on top
> of r209545), and committed it to trunk as r209548. I'm attaching what I
> actually committed.
You certainly can consider any doc changes that mirror code changes
as pre-approved.
Based on what Jeff said, about changes like this one (const-correctness)
going in right away, perhaps get these off your table together with their
associated documentation aspects? And then do one doc change for all the
rest -- or individual ones, I don't have a strong preference.
Thanks for working on this!
Gerald