From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 5372C3857B98; Sun, 13 Nov 2022 19:36:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5372C3857B98
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1668368190;
	bh=lbPxQA8T00z7macIpbtgz4WpW0AhEXMJlFPZeQe5KNQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=s/aYSmpLiR1uHOuFG8VNcsafImjSMKjm2Osm/evbHwRNoniGXyIEpNxDF7FWhJKGz
	 J1HXvbf3Y/LfHTY95mX9rpBQa9z5kbAy8wNDS03/mrk9ZRXf6vVJJ6OyAbtcLVzmJu
	 bAxUS5Wizxxfxv8VVb6WFrf25Hh7O1o1aP+RiSto=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug web/107651] Having two different kind of indexes is very useful
 still
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2022 19:36:30 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: web
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: documentation
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107651-4-QGXAOPHYRN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107651-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107651

--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Li=C5=A1ka from comment #10)
> > But the sphinx generated index is not very useful as it lists all optio=
ns
> > under symbols heading which is very confusing to programmers.
>=20
> It's a minor limitation, one can still jump to individual listings of
> options:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/gcc-command-options.html

That is a TOC and NOT an index.
IT IS NOT A MINOR LIMITATION.
Compare this to the texinfo generated one:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.1.0/gcc/Option-Index.html

(yes the f and m is still combined)
But the - is ignored.
Plus the layout of the index is better.
The two parrallel columns of the sphinx generated index is also bad because=
 the
order is first column then the second which means scrolling back up for the
wrapping. IS there a way to fix that?

Plus when I saw symbol I was thinking function/variable name and not -,&,et=
c.
The texinfo generated index splits out the symbols even which seems like sp=
hinx
should be able to do too which will improve the look slightly.

Searching is not just about knowing keywords but looking into similar named
things which is another reason why the two column for the generated index is
bad idea.=