[FYI] [docs] note that -g opts are implicitly negatable too

[FYI] [docs] note that -g opts are implicitly negatable too

[Alexandre Oliva]

Back in 2017, I made -g* options implicitly negatable, without
realizing there was documentation that required updating.  Oops.
Fixed, at last!

Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu.  I'm installing this as obvious.


for gcc/ChangeLog

	* doc/options.texi (option, RejectNegative): Mention that
	-g-started options are also implicitly negatable.
---
 gcc/doc/options.texi |    6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/doc/options.texi b/gcc/doc/options.texi
index c6e73fd1818ed..f50063c97870b 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/options.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/options.texi
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ the help text to use for @option{--help} (omitted if the second field
 contains the @code{Undocumented} property).
 @end enumerate
 
-By default, all options beginning with ``f'', ``W'' or ``m'' are
+By default, all options beginning with ``f'', ``g'', ``W'' or ``m'' are
 implicitly assumed to take a ``no-'' form.  This form should not be
 listed separately.  If an option beginning with one of these letters
 does not have a ``no-'' form, you can use the @code{RejectNegative}
@@ -239,8 +239,8 @@ and should not be accepted by the driver.
 
 @item RejectNegative
 The option does not have a ``no-'' form.  All options beginning with
-``f'', ``W'' or ``m'' are assumed to have a ``no-'' form unless this
-property is used.
+``f'', ``g'', ``W'' or ``m'' are assumed to have a ``no-'' form unless
+this property is used.
 
 @item Negative(@var{othername})
 The option will turn off another option @var{othername}, which is


-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker                https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist                       GNU Toolchain Engineer
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice
but very few check the facts.  Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>