DJ Delorie <d...@redhat.com> writes:
> The documentation says:
>
> @deftypefn {Target Hook} bool TARGET_CAN_INLINE_P (tree @var{caller}, tree
> @var{callee})
>
> But the code says:
>
> #ifndef TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P
> #define TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P default_target_option_can_inline_p
> #endif
>
> #define TARGET_OPTION_HOOKS \
> { \
> . . .
> TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P, \
>
>
> This hook really has nothing to do with command line options. Which
> spelling is correct? The code, or the documentation?
The OPTION is there because this was introduced for the option
attribute. But the entry in the target structure is named can_inline_p,
and the macro should be TARGET_CAN_INLINE_P. So the doc is the desired
state, and the code is not.
Ian
