This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
move specs documentation to internals manual?
- From: Geoffrey Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Geoffrey Keating <gkeating at apple dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 08 Jul 2005 16:29:49 -0700
- Subject: move specs documentation to internals manual?
- References: <20050708054604.67D4A15D66FE@geoffk5.apple.com> <m3vf3lvld8.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0507081217260.14395@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2005, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> > gkeating@apple.com (Geoffrey Keating) writes:
> >
> > > * gcc.c: Include xregex.h.
> > > (version_compare_spec_function): New.
> > > (spec_function): Add version-compare.
> > > (replace_outfile_spec_function): Reformat comment.
> > > (compare_version_strings): New.
> >
> > I think version-compare should be documented in the specs file section
> > of invoke.texi.
>
> I think having this documentation in invoke.texi is a mistake - specs are
> internals rather than something for users to use. The documentation
> should either be in the internals manual or be in comments in gcc.c, not
> both and not the user manual.
I agree with both comments here: it's lame that we have duplicated
documentation (and explains why I didn't realise that I had to change
two places), and I don't think that we should be considering specs to
be an user-level interface to GCC.
So, what do people think about (a) deleting the big comment in gcc.c
that tries to explain specs (leaving a pointer to the manual), and (b)
moving the specs documentation to the internals manual?