Re: ada/9406: Documentation suggestion

[Simon Wright <simon at pushface dot org>]

The following reply was made to PR ada/9406; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Simon Wright <simon at pushface dot org>
To: bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org, bje at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
   gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, simon at pushface dot org, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
Cc: bje at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org
Subject: Re: ada/9406: Documentation suggestion
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:35:16 GMT

 > X-Envelope-To: simon at pushface dot org
 > X-Forwarding-To: simon at pushface dot org
 > Date: 19 Feb 2003 20:56:15 -0000
 > From: bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org
 > Reply-To: bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org, bje at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
 >   gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, simon at pushface dot org, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
 > 
 > Synopsis: Documentation suggestion
 > 
 > State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
 > State-Changed-By: bosch
 > State-Changed-When: Wed Feb 19 20:56:15 2003
 > State-Changed-Why:
 >     Suggestion inconsistent with wording in language standard and rest of documentation. Furthermore the term "entry unit" is confusing as both "entry" and "unit" are terms defined in the Ada reference manual.
 > 
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9406
 
 You are of course entirely welcome to reject the suggested
 rewording. However,
 
 (a) the first part of the patch corrected a grammatical error.
 
 (b) the second part begins "Run the Ada binder on the Ada main
 program." but ----
 
          we are in a section of the manual which begins "If the main
          program is in some language other than Ada"!!!!!!!
 
 (c) (I missed this) the next para has the same error, it begins "Link
 the Ada main program".
 
 
 So there is a problem with the manual.
 
 
 My suggestion was to say "run the Ada binder on the Ada entry units"
 but I suppose you could be all formal and say "run the Ada binder on
 all the Ada units that contain subprograms that are called directly or
 indirectly by the non-Ada main program". I think I would have
 understood the former better. I certainly didn't understand the
 present wording!
 
 (by the way, what about non-subprogram entities such as variables?)