Geoffrey Keating wrote:
"Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2005, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoffrey Keating) writes:
* gcc.c: Include xregex.h.
(version_compare_spec_function): New.
(spec_function): Add version-compare.
(replace_outfile_spec_function): Reformat comment.
(compare_version_strings): New.
I think version-compare should be documented in the specs file section
of invoke.texi.
I think having this documentation in invoke.texi is a mistake - specs are
internals rather than something for users to use. The documentation
should either be in the internals manual or be in comments in gcc.c, not
both and not the user manual.
I agree with both comments here: it's lame that we have duplicated
documentation (and explains why I didn't realise that I had to change
two places), and I don't think that we should be considering specs to
be an user-level interface to GCC.
So, what do people think about (a) deleting the big comment in gcc.c
that tries to explain specs (leaving a pointer to the manual), and (b)
moving the specs documentation to the internals manual?
I think it is definitely appropriate to fix gcc.c to point to any
manual.
Which manual is another question. RTEMS uses the specs to specify
board specific linking issues so to us, it is at least something the
user is aware of even if there is only one per board generated which
applies to all code linked for that board. So it is more a user level
feature to us than a gcc internal one.
It should only be documented in one place though.
--joel
--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
