Richard Kenner wrote: >>> How could a newcomer guess why the gcc_force_collect flag needs to be >>> reset? >> That is supposed to be written in a comment. The change log entry >> should describe _what_ is being changed, so that you can find out when a >> particular change was made. > > Not quite. The comments are supposed to say why the code is doing what > it's doing (and, where it's helpful, why it ISN'T doing something else). > Purely historical references in the comments that don't serve to clarify > the present code are discouraged. (We don't want comments turning in a > blog, for example.) > > I view the description in the gcc-patches message as PART of the CM history > of GCC in that IT'S the place to go to get this information. What's > unfortunate, I think, is that there's no easy way to find this message from > the CM revision number.
I think that's Samuel's point - it would be much better to have them in the commit log. FWIW, I agree completely - I've never found ChangeLogs useful, I hate writing them, and I think the linux-kernel guys these days generally have much better checkin messages than we do. Bernd -- This footer brought to you by insane German lawmakers. Analog Devices GmbH Wilhelm-Wagenfeld-Str. 6 80807 Muenchen Sitz der Gesellschaft Muenchen, Registergericht Muenchen HRB 40368 Geschaeftsfuehrer Thomas Wessel, William A. Martin, Margaret Seif
