Re: [wwwdocs] Update GCC5 changes.html

[Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I've put together a few lines describing what I (except
> -fsanitize=alignment) implemented for GCC 5.
> It's the file wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html.

Nice!

> +      <li><code>-fsanitize=float-cast-overflow</code>: check that the result
> +	   of floating-point type to integer conversion does not overflow;</li>

"conversions" (plural)?

> +    <li>A new <code>-Wswitch-bool</code> option has been added for the C and C++
> +	compilers, which warns whenever a <code>switch</code> statement has an
> +	index of boolean type.</li>

Here, and in the other cases, "A new option <code>..." might be less
ambigous -- someone might read this as an option for this command-line
option.  This is just a suggestion, feel free to ignore.

I would say "command-line option" instead of just option, though.

> +    <li>A new <code>-Wlogical-not-parentheses</code> option has been added for the
> +	C and C++ compilers, which warns about logical not used on the left hand
> +	side operand of a comparison.</li>

"logical not" in quotes, perhaps?  Otherwise this may be a bit hard to
parse.

> +    <li>A new <code>-Wsizeof-array-argument</code> option has been added for the
> +	C and C++ compilers, which warns when the <code>sizeof</code> operator is
> +	applied to a parameter that is declared as an array in a function definition.

"has been" instead of "is declard"?

> +    <li>It is possible to disable warnings about conversions between pointers
> +	that have incompatible types via a new warning option
> +	<code>-Wno-incompatible-pointer-types</code>; warnings about implicit
> +	incompatible integer to pointer and pointer to integer conversions via
> +	a new warning option <code>-Wno-int-conversion</code>; and warnings about
> +	qualifiers on pointers being discarded via a new warning option

Should we write "pointer-to-integer" and the like, here and in other
parts of the patch?  Probably best a question for Joseph (and if he
has approved code/document patches where that was not the case, than
the answer pretty likely is now. ;-)

Gerald