On Wed, 17 Aug 2022, Iain Buclaw wrote: > This patch belatedly adds the new features and changes to the D > front-end during the GCC 12 development cycle, as well as a bullet in > the caveat section for D's new bootstrapping requirements.
Nice! > + <strong>D:</strong> > + Building and bootstrapping GDC, the D compiler, now requires a working > GDC > + compiler (GCC version 9.1 or later) and D runtime library, libphobos, as > + the D front end is written in D. Might we be able to omit the "and bootstrapping" reference, which can be seen as a specific flavor of builing? And put "libphobos" in parentheses, in line with "GCC version 9.1..."? > + by default, but compiles and works if <code>--enable-libphobos</code> is > + used. Other targets may require a more recent minimum version of GCC to > + bootstrap. Specifics are documented for affected targets in the Might we be able to omit "for affected targets"? How do you feel about + <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html";>installation + instructions</a>. instead of + <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html";>manual</a> for + installing GCC. Genuine questions, all of them. > + <li>On supported targets, the <code>__traits(compiles)</code> > expression No comma between "targets" and "the". > + <li><code>-fcheck=</code>, enables or disables the code generation of > + specific run-time contract checks. No comma (I think)? ALso for the following entries. > + <li><code>-fcheckaction=</code>, controls the run-time behaviour on an We generally use US English for consistency. :) > + <li><code>-fdump-c++-spec=</code>, dumps all compiled > + <code>extern(C++)</code> declarations as C++ code to a file. "to a file as C++ code"? > + The supplimentary option <code>-fdump-c++-spec-verbose</code> turns on > + emission of comments for ignored declaration in the generated C++ spec. "declarations" > + <li><code>-fextern-std=</code>, controls which C++ standard > + <code>extern(C++)</code> declarations are compiled to be compatible > + with. It feels something is missing here (in terms of grammar)? > + <li><code>-fsave-mixins=</code>, saves mixins expanded at compile-time > to > + a file. > + </li> Will it be clear to everyone what a mixin is? (It's not to me, but I do not know D.) > + <li>Deprecated and removed features: : > + <li>The <code>-ftransition=dip25</code> and > + <code>-ftransition=dip1000</code> compiler switches have been renamed > + to <code>-fpreview=dip25</code> and <code>-fprefix=dip1000</code>. > + </li> Hmm, so the feature as such has not been deprecated or removed; just how it's been invoked has changed. I hope this is useful feedback. As maintainer for everything D in GCC you do not need approval to commit, I'm just happy to help (from a consistency and "naive user" perspective if nothing else). Cheers, Gerald
