Where it says:
Enabled at level `-O0'. When disabled explicitly, it also imply
`-fno-section-anchors' that is otherwise enabled at `-O0' on some
targets.
Firstly, "imply" should be "implies".
Secondly, what does "disabling" the option mean ("When disabled explicitly...")
- does it mean using "ftoplevel-reordering" (enabling reordering), in which
case wouldn't it be better to say "When top-level reordering is enabled
explicitly..." or "When -ftoplevel-reordering is used..." and be less ambiguous
(and avoid the double negative)?
Thirdly, "it also imply `-fno-section-anchors' that is otherwise enabled at
`-O0' on some targets" seems to use the opposite interpretation of "enabled"
compared to the paragraph above (unless I'm getting it wrong). What it's trying
to say is that -fno-toplevel-reorder implies -fno-section-anchors which is
otherwise *disabled* on some targets, i.e. some targets otherwise assume
-fsection-anchors).
--
Summary: Documentation for "-fno-toplevel-reorder" is confusing
(and wrong)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: driver
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: davmac at davmac dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41179
