On 9/6/20 9:23 AM, Armin Brauns via Gcc-patches wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> * gcc.c: document %T spec file directive
> * doc/invoke.texi:
> remove %p, %P spec file directives
> add %M, %R, %V, %nSTR, %>S, % file directives
> add sanitize, version-compare, include, gt a
First, as a general principle I don't think it's really a good idea to
have the documentation for specs duplicated in two places. It would be
better to have it in exactly one place, and so avoid having two copies
getting out of sync in future.
I'd say that specs are an internal implementation
On 15/10/2020 10.11, Armin Brauns wrote:
> On 02/10/2020 19.20, Armin Brauns wrote:
>> On 06/09/2020 17.23, Armin Brauns wrote:
>>> There were some differences between the actual code in do_spec_1, its
>>> source comment, and the documentation in doc/invoke.texi. These should
>>> now be resolved.
>
On 02/10/2020 19.20, Armin Brauns wrote:
> On 06/09/2020 17.23, Armin Brauns wrote:
>> There were some differences between the actual code in do_spec_1, its
>> source comment, and the documentation in doc/invoke.texi. These should
>> now be resolved.
> PING: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patche
On 06/09/2020 17.23, Armin Brauns wrote:
> There were some differences between the actual code in do_spec_1, its
> source comment, and the documentation in doc/invoke.texi. These should
> now be resolved.
PING: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553321.html
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553321.html
On 06/09/2020 17.23, Armin Brauns wrote:
> There were some differences between the actual code in do_spec_1, its
> source comment, and the documentation in doc/invoke.texi. These should
> now be resolved.
>
There were some differences between the actual code in do_spec_1, its
source comment, and the documentation in doc/invoke.texi. These should
now be resolved.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gcc.c: document %T spec file directive
* doc/invoke.texi:
remove %p, %P spec file directives
