[PATCH] Try to fill crossref in passes.texi (GCC Internals)

[PATCH] Try to fill crossref in passes.texi (GCC Internals)

[crquan]

From: "Dennis, CHENG Renquan" <crquan@fedoraproject.org>

Hi, all,
  I'm new to Gcc hacking world, while reading these documentation (GCC Internals),
found some places like this passes.texi may be unfinished, especially the places
marked as CROSSREF, BUG, and TODO should be, right? I am trying to finish some
parts in a series of patches; please give comments for anywhere I may be wrong;
Thanks,

--- gcc-4.5-20100701/gcc/doc/passes.texi.orig	2009-11-25 13:08:37.000000000 +0800
+++ gcc-4.5-20100701/gcc/doc/passes.texi	2010-07-03 00:57:24.598463502 +0800
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-@c markers: CROSSREF BUG TODO
+@c markers: BUG TODO
 
 @c Copyright (C) 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,
 @c 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 Free Software
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ where near complete.
 The language front end is invoked only once, via
 @code{lang_hooks.parse_file}, to parse the entire input.  The language
 front end may use any intermediate language representation deemed
-appropriate.  The C front end uses GENERIC trees (CROSSREF), plus
+appropriate.  The C front end uses GENERIC trees (@pxref{GENERIC}), plus
 a double handful of language specific tree codes defined in
 @file{c-common.def}.  The Fortran front end uses a completely different
 private representation.
@@ -46,10 +46,9 @@ private representation.
 At some point the front end must translate the representation used in the
 front end to a representation understood by the language-independent
 portions of the compiler.  Current practice takes one of two forms.
-The C front end manually invokes the gimplifier (CROSSREF) on each function,
+The C front end manually invokes the gimplifier (@pxref{GIMPLE}) on each function,
 and uses the gimplifier callbacks to convert the language-specific tree
-nodes directly to GIMPLE (CROSSREF) before passing the function off to
-be compiled.
+nodes directly to GIMPLE before passing the function off to be compiled.
 The Fortran front end converts from a private representation to GENERIC,
 which is later lowered to GIMPLE when the function is compiled.  Which
 route to choose probably depends on how well GENERIC (plus extensions)
@@ -111,7 +110,7 @@ definitions immediately or queue them fo
 @cindex GIMPLE
 @dfn{Gimplification} is a whimsical term for the process of converting
 the intermediate representation of a function into the GIMPLE language
-(CROSSREF).  The term stuck, and so words like ``gimplification'',
+(@pxref{GIMPLE}).  The term stuck, and so words like ``gimplification'',
 ``gimplify'', ``gimplifier'' and the like are sprinkled throughout this
 section of code.
 
--
Git 1.7.1.1

CHENG Renquan
38 St Thomas Walk, Singapore 238118      http://crquan.fedorapeople.org

Re: [PATCH] Try to fill crossref in passes.texi (GCC Internals)

[Laurynas Biveinis]

Hello,

> Hi, all,
>  I'm new to Gcc hacking world, while reading these documentation (GCC Internals),
> found some places like this passes.texi may be unfinished, especially the places
> marked as CROSSREF, BUG, and TODO should be, right? I am trying to finish some
> parts in a series of patches; please give comments for anywhere I may be wrong;
> Thanks,

I am not too qualified to comment on the patch itself (to my limited
understanding of Texinfo, it looks fine), however:

- all GCC patches must have ChangeLog entries, including documentation ones;
- the patch submission needs to state how the patch was tested. In the
case of a documentation patch it amounts to running make info dvi, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html under "Documentation Changes".

Could you resubmit the patch with these requirements addressed?

Thank you,
-- 
Laurynas

Re: [PATCH] Try to fill crossref in passes.texi (GCC Internals)

[Manuel López-Ibáñez]

On 9 July 2010 14:58, Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> Hi, all,
>>  I'm new to Gcc hacking world, while reading these documentation (GCC Internals),
>> found some places like this passes.texi may be unfinished, especially the places
>> marked as CROSSREF, BUG, and TODO should be, right? I am trying to finish some
>> parts in a series of patches; please give comments for anywhere I may be wrong;
>> Thanks,
>
> I am not too qualified to comment on the patch itself (to my limited
> understanding of Texinfo, it looks fine), however:

I think it looks fine if it compiles and the links work. I cannot
approve and the people that can may be travelling, so please have
patience. If you need someone to commit the patch for you, please say
so.

> - all GCC patches must have ChangeLog entries, including documentation ones;

Like this: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/ChangeLog

Cheers,

Manuel