From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A7553857346 for ; Tue, 17 May 2022 09:00:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 7A7553857346 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-203-4_cyVFvZPAOzqoshb-FZnQ-1; Tue, 17 May 2022 05:00:34 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 4_cyVFvZPAOzqoshb-FZnQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98BC9100F84A; Tue, 17 May 2022 09:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.23]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D8682166B2D; Tue, 17 May 2022 09:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 24H90VMk4067094 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 May 2022 11:00:31 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 24H90TD34067093; Tue, 17 May 2022 11:00:29 +0200 Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 11:00:29 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Tobias Burnus Cc: Gerald Pfeifer , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [wwwdocs][Patch] Add OpenMP by-GCC-version implementation status Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <798bc8e6-567b-5ed6-e298-655948e89f5e@mentor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 09:00:39 -0000 On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:49:42AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Thoughts on this part? Either place is fine. > > > +Map-order clarificationsGCC? > > This entry I gave up on, it isn't exactly clear to me what that > > bullet is about and once we figure that out, we need to do some archeology > > on whether we support it at all and if yes, since which commit and thus > > since which GCC version. > I concur – but the question is how to handle it now? Leave it and > correct it later? Comment/remove it? Write ? in the Version column alone instead of GCC? and in comment say To be verified or something similar. BTW, it would be really nice to use colors like https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html uses, use just GCC versions instead of GCC version and No instead of N and use hyperlinks to changes.html OpenMP ids (or just changes.html if we don't have an id). And, for No we could in the future hyperlink to bugzilla if we file PRs for those missing or WIP features which people can assign etc. But that can be changed incrementally. > Can you check whether you now like the bullet points? If so, I will > update the .texi to match. LGTM. Jakub