This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] GTY documentation update
* Laurynas Biveinis wrote on Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 06:54:40AM CET:
> > You can make reviews even easier by ensuring that your patches are
> > either inline (and not mangled) or attached but not declared as
> > octet-stream MIME type, so that replying to them inline is
> > straight-forward. ?Thanks.
>
> I am not sure how to achieve this with Gmail. .diff or .txt attachment
> file extension perhaps? Does anyone have Gmail-specific tips here?
I could offer http://www.google.com/search?q=sending+patches+with+gmail
> >> +If @code{field_vec->elts} stores @code{n} elements, then @code{size}
> >
> > I'd use @var{n} ...
>
> Texinfo manual says "Use the @var command to indicate metasyntactic
> variables" and "Do not use @var for the names of particular variables
> in programming languages." I have trouble understanding if n and size
> are metasyntactic or not, so I really don't know which one to choose.
There is an easy test to find out whether metasyntactic is right or not:
If you replace all instances of the variable in question with X (or all
instances of all variables in question with X1, X2, ...) and that does
not change the meaning of the text, then a metasyntactic variable is
appropriate. In other words, the name of the variable has no relevance
outside of the context of the manual.
> Here is v2 of the patch (trying attachment with .diff this time)
Hmm, the .diff didn't seem to help.
> Further comments,
Not from me, you need somebody else to approve the patch if you cannot
do it yourself. I'm not sure if you can, you being GTY maintainer.
Thanks,
Ralf