Re: Update doc/gimple.texi to reflect change from union to class hierarchy

[David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>]

On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 22:22 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Successfully generates HTML, info and pdf via appropriate make
> > invocations; example of resulting HTML can be seen at the bottom of:
> > 
> > http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2014-04-25/Tuple-representation.html
> > 
> > The diagram is split over pages 178-180 of the generated PDF:
> > 
> > http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2014-04-25/gccint.pdf
> 
> When I just checked that PDF did not (yet?) have that table.

Sadly I see a discrepancy between the page numbering as reported by my
PDF viewer (evince 3.4.0 with poppler 0.18.4), vs the page numbering
that appears at the top of the pages themselves, due to the viewer
appearing to start page numbering at "1" with the first page - despite
15 pages of frontmatter.  In my viewer, the "Introduction" page has "1"
at the top of it, but appears is page 16 in the viewer's navigation UI.
I don't know if this is an issue with Evince/Poppler (this *used* to
work; in a past life I briefly worked on Evince), or with the toolchain
used to generate the PDF.

I was referring to the page numbers visible in the pages themselves.  In
my viewer, pages 178-180 appear as pages 194-196 in the navigation UI,
and the table does appear there.

Sorry for any confusion.


> > but I don't think there's a good way to avoid page breaks there.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > Bootstrap in progress [do pure doc fixes require a bootstrap?]
> 
> Not generally, no.
> 
> > OK for trunk, assuming bootstraps? (and eventually for the 4.9 branch,
> > after a few days?)
> 
> Yes and yes.
> 
> (I did not review the technical accuracy of the diagram in detail, but 
> (a) micromanagement is not helpful and (b) the current documentation 
> is plain wrong.)

Thanks.

> The one thing that confused me a bit at first was the line
>   +- gimple_statement_base
> where I then thought all the others should move their indentation
> left by four or so columns.  Which is not what you are trying to
> state in fact.  How about omitting the "+-" from that one?
> 
> Gerald

Sure; omitted.

Looking at the generated "info", it occurred to me that the diagram
should live in its own node, so I took the liberty of adding that also.

Successfully bootstrapped (again); and make info/html/pdf work as
expected.

Committed to trunk as r209879.  Will commit to 4.9 in a few days unless
anyone objects.


Dave