Should we move the --param documention to gccint?

[Jeff Law]

On 11/13/24 5:33 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2024, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
>> We changed one of the AArch64-specific --params for GCC 14.
>> Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of people were relying on the
>> previous behaviour.
> 
> Umpf.
> 
>> Every --param is documented in the user-facing manual, so it's not
>> surprising that people picked it up.  The documentation of --param
>> itself starts with:
> :
>> So we can point at the last paragraph above and say "nyah, nyah, told you so".
>> But that isn't helpful.  The disclaimer is at the head of a huge table,
>> and anyone interested in tuning things is likely to find the specific
>> params that interest them by searching for keywords, rather than by
>> reading the whole text from beginning to end.  Besides, the documentation
>> is supposed to be there to help people, rather than be something to hit
>> them over the head with.
> 
> I like your attitude.
> 
> And I like your suggestion:
> 
>> But to avoid confusion, how about moving the documentation of the
>> individual --params from the user-facing manual to gccint (with a link)?
> 
> In fact, I was going to suggest the same approach until, re-reading your
> mail more carefully, realized this was actually your proposal already. :-)
> 
> So, okay, unless someone fiercly objects in which case we need to have a
> deeper conversation.
Yea, works for me as well.  In an ideal world we really don't want users 
mucking with --params, so moving them into the internals manual seems 
like the right thing to do.

jeff