[tree-ssa] cfg.texi needs reviewing by a native speaker (Was: Re: "Documentation by paper")

[law@redhat.com]

In message <200402042105.28601.stevenb@suse.de>, Steven Bosscher writes:
 >On Wednesday 04 February 2004 20:09, Robert Dewar wrote:
 >> Joe Buck wrote:
 >> > OK, the *best* would be written by that almost non-existent programmer
 >> > who combines a love of writing clear English prose with the extraordinary
 >> > discipline required to do it first and keep it current.  But since this
 >> > species is almost non-existent, you need to read my phrase "best
 >> > documentation" for "best documentation achievable in practice".
 >>
 >> You are FAR too pessimistic, I know lots of programmers who meet
 >> these criteria.
 >
 >I most certainly don't qualify for Joe's description.  I'm sure one
 >of you does, and since part of this discussion was about documenting
 >what a basic block is, I kindly ask you, as native speakers who care
 >about good documentation, to review this new chapter for the manual.
 >
 >It's based on Jan Hubicka's old cfg.texi, which he&others wrote after
 >doing a lot of work on the CFG representation in GCC.  That document
 >is almost three years old now, but it was never reviewed (not even by
 >the people in this thread who say they care about documentation).  I
 >don't claim it's perfect -- on the contrary.  But does it look like
 >an acceptable start?
 >
 >Thanks,
 >
 >Gr.
 >Steven
 >
 >doc/
 >	* cfg.texi: New chapter for the internals manual.  Briefly describes
 >	the data structures used to represent the control flow graph, and
 >	the issues and API to modify and maintain the CFG.
Approved.  

Funny -- I was looking for some of this just the other day (frequency stuff).

Now what we need is better documentation of things like the algorithms we're
using to do prediction & frequency computation/propagation. :-)


Jeff