Typo in c-tree.texi.

Typo in c-tree.texi.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

I think there's a small typo in c-tree.texi:

--- c-tree.texi.old	Tue Jan  1 05:05:41 2002
+++ c-tree.texi	Tue Jan  1 05:06:34 2002
@@ -761,7 +761,7 @@
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
 derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+@code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC} (@pxref{Containers}).


-- 
Gaute B Strokkenes                      http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
YOW!!  The land of the rising SONY!!

Unreviewed patch: Typo in c-tree.texi.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

I sent the below some time ago.  Since this one-byte change is
extremely straightforward, perhaps someone could take a look?

--- c-tree.texi.old	Tue Jan  1 05:05:41 2002
+++ c-tree.texi	Tue Jan  1 05:06:34 2002
@@ -761,7 +761,7 @@
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
 derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+@code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC}
 (@pxref{Containers}).

-- 
Gaute Strokkenes                        http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
I like your SNOOPY POSTER!!

[PATCH] rtl.texi typo fix.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

I found another typo, this time in rtl.texi.  I'm also taking the
opportunity to resend the c-tree.texi patch I sent earlier.

-- 
Gaute Strokkenes                        http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
Am I elected yet?

Index: c-tree.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/c-tree.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -r1.27 c-tree.texi
--- c-tree.texi	17 Dec 2001 13:08:51 -0000	1.27
+++ c-tree.texi	8 Jan 2002 08:58:40 -0000
@@ -761,7 +761,7 @@
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
 derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+@code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC} (@pxref{Containers}).
Index: rtl.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/rtl.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -r1.24 rtl.texi
--- rtl.texi	7 Jan 2002 19:03:37 -0000	1.24
+++ rtl.texi	8 Jan 2002 08:58:40 -0000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
 In @code{mem} expressions, nonzero for reference to a scalar known not
 to be a member of a structure, union, or array.  Zero for such
 references and for indirections through pointers, even pointers pointing
-to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
+to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_IN_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
 don't know whether this @code{mem} is in a structure or not.  Both flags should
 never be simultaneously set.
 Stored in the @code{frame_related} field and printed as @samp{/f}.

Unreviewed patch.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

This is a resend of:

  <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00495.html>

which fixes two very simple typos in the internals manual.

-- 
Gaute Strokkenes                        http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
FEELINGS are cascading over me!!!
Index: c-tree.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/c-tree.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.28
diff -u -r1.28 c-tree.texi
--- c-tree.texi	16 Jan 2002 00:09:27 -0000	1.28
+++ c-tree.texi	29 Jan 2002 10:44:29 -0000
@@ -761,7 +761,7 @@
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
 derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+@code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC} (@pxref{Containers}).
Index: rtl.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/rtl.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -u -r1.26 rtl.texi
--- rtl.texi	23 Jan 2002 17:30:28 -0000	1.26
+++ rtl.texi	29 Jan 2002 10:44:29 -0000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
 In @code{mem} expressions, nonzero for reference to a scalar known not
 to be a member of a structure, union, or array.  Zero for such
 references and for indirections through pointers, even pointers pointing
-to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
+to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_IN_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
 don't know whether this @code{mem} is in a structure or not.  Both flags should
 never be simultaneously set.
 Stored in the @code{frame_related} field and printed as @samp{/f}.

[PATCH] Fix documentation typos.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

This is a resend of:

  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00354.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00495.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg02058.html

It would be nice if anyone could have a look at this simple, 4-byte
change sometime soon.

-- 
Gaute Strokkenes                        http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
Yow!  STYROFOAM..
Index: c-tree.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/c-tree.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -r1.30 c-tree.texi
--- c-tree.texi	19 Feb 2002 02:53:32 -0000	1.30
+++ c-tree.texi	19 Feb 2002 05:16:41 -0000
@@ -761,7 +761,7 @@
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
 derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+@code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC} (@pxref{Containers}).
Index: rtl.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/rtl.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.28
diff -u -r1.28 rtl.texi
--- rtl.texi	19 Feb 2002 05:01:24 -0000	1.28
+++ rtl.texi	19 Feb 2002 05:16:41 -0000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
 In @code{mem} expressions, nonzero for reference to a scalar known not
 to be a member of a structure, union, or array.  Zero for such
 references and for indirections through pointers, even pointers pointing
-to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
+to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_IN_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
 don't know whether this @code{mem} is in a structure or not.  Both flags should
 never be simultaneously set.
 Stored in the @code{frame_related} field and printed as @samp{/f}.

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos.

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> This is a resend of:
>
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00354.html
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00495.html
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg02058.html
>
> It would be nice if anyone could have a look at this simple, 4-byte
> change sometime soon.

It's really embarrassing that nobody has reviewed/committed this yet,
but perhaps it's because you haven't provided a ChangeLog entry?

I created a ChangeLog entry and committed the rtl.texi patch with
a bit of reformatting to avoid overly long lines. Can someone else
please review the other part of the patch?!

Thanks for the patch (and your patience),
Gerald


2002-02-19  Gaute B Strokkenes <gs234@cam.ac.uk>

        * doc/rtl.texi (Flags, MEM_SCALAR_P): Fix typo.

Index: doc/rtl.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/rtl.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.28
diff -u -3 -p -r1.28 rtl.texi
--- rtl.texi	2002/02/19 05:01:24	1.28
+++ rtl.texi	2002/02/19 17:17:52
@@ -501,9 +501,9 @@ Stored in the @code{jump} field and prin
 In @code{mem} expressions, nonzero for reference to a scalar known not
 to be a member of a structure, union, or array.  Zero for such
 references and for indirections through pointers, even pointers pointing
-to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_STRUCT_P} are clear, then we
-don't know whether this @code{mem} is in a structure or not.  Both flags should
-never be simultaneously set.
+to scalar types.  If both this flag and @code{MEM_IN_STRUCT_P} are clear,
+then we don't know whether this @code{mem} is in a structure or not.
+Both flags should never be simultaneously set.
 Stored in the @code{frame_related} field and printed as @samp{/f}.

 @findex MEM_VOLATILE_P

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos.

[Zack Weinberg]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 06:24:50PM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

> I created a ChangeLog entry and committed the rtl.texi patch with
> a bit of reformatting to avoid overly long lines. Can someone else
> please review the other part of the patch?!

Since there is no TYPE_INFO macro anywhere in the compiler, I would
say that the change to c-tree.texi qualifies as an obvious fix.
Please check it in.

zw

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos.

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
>> This is a resend of:
>>
>>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00354.html
>>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg00495.html
>>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-01/msg02058.html
>>
>> It would be nice if anyone could have a look at this simple, 4-byte
>> change sometime soon.
> 
> It's really embarrassing that nobody has reviewed/committed this
> yet, but perhaps it's because you haven't provided a ChangeLog
> entry?

Well, I don't really know how to make ChangeLog entries.  Since I
don't have my own computer, I didn't configure gcc and try make dvi or
anything like that, even though according to the instructions I should
have (but I did run makeinfo manually).  It seemed a bit excessive to
do all that just in order to notify the GCC maintainers of two very
straightforward typos.  In fact, I do not think I would have submitted
a patch had it not been for the fact that describing the typos
verbally would probably take more time and be less illuminating.

> I created a ChangeLog entry and committed the rtl.texi patch with
> a bit of reformatting to avoid overly long lines. Can someone else
> please review the other part of the patch?!

Basically, there are two functions f: A -> B and g: B -> A.  The
paragraph says that even though the composite fg: B -> B is the
identity on B, the other composite gf: A -> A is _not_ the identity on
A.  The mistake is that one of the function names is misspelt:
TYPE_INFO() rather than TYPE_BINFO().

I emulated your changelog entry and used M-q in emacs to reformat the
paragraph:

2002-02-19  Gaute B Strokkenes <gs234@cam.ac.uk>

        * doc/c-tree.texi (Classes, TYPE_BINFO): Fix typo.

Index: c-tree.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/c-tree.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -r1.30 c-tree.texi
--- c-tree.texi	19 Feb 2002 02:53:32 -0000	1.30
+++ c-tree.texi	19 Feb 2002 18:54:55 -0000
@@ -760,8 +760,8 @@
 qualifiers.  However, it is not always the case that @code{TYPE_BINFO
 (BINFO_TYPE (y))} is always the same binfo as @code{y}.  The reason is
 that if @code{y} is a binfo representing a base-class @code{B} of a
-derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B}, and
-@code{TYPE_INFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
+derived class @code{D}, then @code{BINFO_TYPE (y)} will be @code{B},
+and @code{TYPE_BINFO (BINFO_TYPE (y))} will be @code{B} as its own
 base-class, rather than as a base-class of @code{D}.
 
 The @code{BINFO_BASETYPES} is a @code{TREE_VEC} (@pxref{Containers}).

> 2002-02-19  Gaute B Strokkenes <gs234@cam.ac.uk>
> 
>         * doc/rtl.texi (Flags, MEM_SCALAR_P): Fix typo.

Gee whiz, my name in big letters... ;-)

-- 
Big Gaute                               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
Yow!  I'm having a quadraphonic sensation of two winos
 alone in a steel mill!

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos.

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Since there is no TYPE_INFO macro anywhere in the compiler, I would
> say that the change to c-tree.texi qualifies as an obvious fix.
> Please check it in.

Thanks for checking, Zack.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> I emulated your changelog entry and used M-q in emacs to reformat the
> paragraph:
>
> 2002-02-19  Gaute B Strokkenes <gs234@cam.ac.uk>
>
>         * doc/c-tree.texi (Classes, TYPE_BINFO): Fix typo.

Thanks! I have just committed this.

>> 2002-02-19  Gaute B Strokkenes <gs234@cam.ac.uk>
>>
>>         * doc/rtl.texi (Flags, MEM_SCALAR_P): Fix typo.
> Gee whiz, my name in big letters... ;-)

You can have more of that if you send further patches ;-), though if
these are getting more substantial, we'd need a copyright assignment
as described on <http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html>.

Gerald
-- 
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Gunther Nikl wrote:

> > @^ is a circumflex accent and belongs there.
> 
>   Is that a common spelling for role?

Yes.

> > @, is a cedilla but is here being misused as if it corresponded to @.
> > (end of sentence following an uppercase letter).  So I've applied the
> > second patch of the patch only.
> 
>   Thank you. But I didn't understand the explanation why @, was misused
>   because it sounds like it could have been correct.

TeX allows spaces after certain punctuation marks to stretch more than
ordinary spaces between words.  In particular, spaces after ends of
sentences are allowed to stretch the most.  A full stop that is preceded
by a capital letter isn't considered to end a sentence (it's presumed more
likely to follow an initial in the middle of a sentence).  To override
these heuristics, Texinfo provides @: (which indicates that the
immediately previous full stop does not end a sentence) and @. (which is a
full stop that ends a sentence even those immediately following a capital
letter).  Capital letters have the same effect on the stretching of spaces
following other punctuation marks, but nothing corresponding to @. is
provided to override this (the stretching in those cases is smaller and so
the difference following a capital letter less visible).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm@polyomino.org.uk

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos

[Gunther Nikl]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 11:24:55AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Gunther Nikl wrote:
> 
> > This patch is supposed to correct two typos in the documentation
> > but I am not sure whether these are really typos. I believe that
> > '@' characters removed by this patchs are stray ones.
> 
> @^ is a circumflex accent and belongs there.

  Is that a common spelling for role?

> @, is a cedilla but is here being misused as if it corresponded to @.
> (end of sentence following an uppercase letter).  So I've applied the
> second patch of the patch only.

  Thank you. But I didn't understand the explanation why @, was misused
  because it sounds like it could have been correct.

  Gunther

Re: [PATCH] Fix documentation typos

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Gunther Nikl wrote:

> This patch is supposed to correct two typos in the documentation
> but I am not sure whether these are really typos. I believe that
> '@' characters removed by this patchs are stray ones.

@^ is a circumflex accent and belongs there.  @, is a cedilla but is here 
being misused as if it corresponded to @. (end of sentence following an 
uppercase letter).  So I've applied the second patch of the patch only.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm@polyomino.org.uk

[PATCH] Fix documentation typos

[Gunther Nikl]

[This is the second try because the first mail didn't make it]

Hello!

This patch is supposed to correct two typos in the documentation
but I am not sure whether these are really typos. I believe that
'@' characters removed by this patchs are stray ones.

Gunther

--- cut ---

2003-11-27  Gunther Nikl  <gni@gecko.de>

	* doc/cppinternals.texi (Lexing a token):  Fix typo.
	* doc/tm.texi (SYSROOT_HEADERS_SUFFIX_SPEC): Ditto.

diff -rup gcc-3.4/gcc/doc/cppinternals.texi gcc-3.4-gg/gcc/doc/cppinternals.texi
--- gcc-3.4/gcc/doc/cppinternals.texi	Mon Jan  7 20:03:36 2002
+++ gcc-3.4-gg/gcc/doc/cppinternals.texi	Tue Nov 25 14:38:57 2003
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ will be removed, so I'll not discuss it 
 The job of @code{_cpp_lex_direct} is simply to lex a token.  It is not
 responsible for issues like directive handling, returning lookahead
 tokens directly, multiple-include optimization, or conditional block
-skipping.  It necessarily has a minor r@^ole to play in memory
+skipping.  It necessarily has a minor role to play in memory
 management of lexed lines.  I discuss these issues in a separate section
 (@pxref{Lexing a line}).
 
diff -rup gcc-3.4/gcc/doc/tm.texi gcc-3.4-gg/gcc/doc/tm.texi
--- gcc-3.4/gcc/doc/tm.texi	Mon Nov 17 09:52:33 2003
+++ gcc-3.4-gg/gcc/doc/tm.texi	Tue Nov 25 14:38:28 2003
@@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ et al, within sysroot+suffix.
 @defmac SYSROOT_HEADERS_SUFFIX_SPEC
 Define this macro to add a headers_suffix to the target sysroot when
 GCC is configured with a sysroot.  This will cause GCC to pass the
-updated sysroot+headers_suffix to CPP@, causing it to search for
+updated sysroot+headers_suffix to CPP, causing it to search for
 usr/include, et al, within sysroot+headers_suffix.
 @end defmac
 
--- cut ---