Hi Sandra! On 2026-02-21T13:39:21-0700, Sandra Loosemore <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that GCC's default language dialect for both C and C++ includes > support for the standard attribute syntax, we should encourage users > to prefer that instead of the legacy GNU syntax, while recognizing > that there is a lot of code out there using the latter. This patch > updates the discussion in the introduction to the Attributes section > with examples showing attribute placement in both syntaxes and focuses > the syntax section on the GNU syntax only. (Users can read the C/C++ > standards, programming books or tutorials, etc to learn about the > standard syntax, so we don't need to document that in detail.)
Agreed. > gcc/ChangeLog > PR c++/102397 > * gcc/doc/extend.texi [...] > (Attribute Syntax): Rename section to... > (GNU Attribute Syntax): ...this. [...] Fix cross-references. > --- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi > +++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi > -@node Attribute Syntax > -@subsection Attribute Syntax > +@node GNU Attribute Syntax > +@subsection GNU Attribute Syntax Doesn't changing the '@node' name imply that output (HTML) file names change likewise, and therefore web URLs change likewise, and therefore existing URLs break? Per 'info texinfo', "Choosing Node Names": | [...] | Because node names are used in cross-references, it is not desirable | to casually change them once published. When you delete or rename a | node, it is usually a good idea to define an ‘@anchor’ with the old | name. That way, references from other manuals, from mail archives, and | so on are not invalidated. *Note @anchor::. | [...] ..., or, I suppose, restore the original '@node' name, but keep the updated '@subsection' name? Grüße Thomas
