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: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline

Scott Robert Ladd wrote:

Documentation desperately needs to be considered, but it won't likely receive a priority so long as it is not funded by someone.

I don't see why documentation should be any more of an issue than coding

Documentating isn't as fun as coding.

Documentation is *part* of coding, a fundamental and important part. My view is that no code should ever be accepted for inclusion unless it is fully documented. If people have fun doing a half baked job of coding without properly documention, that's fine, but I do not find it a useful contribution to *any* project, regardless of licensing or style of development.

I have not looked at the tree-ssa code in detail. I will try to do so
in the near future. But in general terms, I would be opposed to its
inclusion if the documentation is incomplete or inadequate.

Some people recognize this; one of my primary clients is paying me to document a free software project's algorithms and design. That project, however, is not GCC. Perhaps someone *is* being funded to write GCC documentation; I don't know who they are, though, or what their mandate might be.

The fact that something is Free Software should never be an excuse for lack of documentation.

To me, a good programmer takes pride in the excellence of documentation
as an integral part of the code.

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