On 3/14/23 10:04, Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote:
Thank you for the review! Updated version below with your suggestions.
This looks fine to me, from a writing perspective at least.
When spot-checking the pdf I noticed a strange split of the page after the next after the section I changed: last on page 484 "17.17 Including Patterns in Machine Descriptions", there's a "(include" last on the page and "pathname)" on top of page 485. I'm afraid this patch triggered that. IMHO it'd be wrong to diddle with formatting of *that* in *this* patch, instead leaving it to a follow-up-patch. I think the obvious fix is to *not* split up (include pathname)" because that just looks odd even without the page end in-between. Right?
Yes. I was skimming through the PDF of the GCC user manual myself last week, and noticed a *lot* of problems with both extraneous line breaks and lines that are too long and get cut off on the right in preformatted text pieces (including the option tables). I'm sure the internals manual is even worse because it's gotten much less clean-up effort than the user-facing documentation.
FWIW, I consider fixes to whitespace, adding missing markup like @code, etc to be "obvious" changes in the same category as fixing typos. There's no need to ask for review of such changes, just go ahead and push them and post the patch of what you did.
-Sandra
