On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:58:30 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > The command "compile code k = 3;" makes the change persistent.  Contrary to it
> > command "compile code int k = 3;" would not be persistent which is described
> > about 3 paragraphs beneath:
> > 	Variables and types that are created as part
> > 	of the @code{compile} command are not persistent, and only exist as
> > 	long as the injected object code exists.  This example is valid:
> > 
> > 	@smallexample
> > 	compile code int ff = 5; printf ("ff is %d\n", ff);
> > 	@end smallexample
> 
> Then maybe we need to tell what "persistent" means in this context.
> Something like "visible to the rest of the program for the duration of
> this run".

I find this was said by "and only exist as long as the injected object code
exists.".  But I have therefore changed the sentence to:
	Variables and types that are created as part of the @code{compile}
	command are not visible to the rest of the program for the duration of
	this run.

BTW I would say s/this run/its run/.

There is also later this sentence with "persistence" but I have left it as is:
	However, as variables in the (example) program persist with their
	assigned values, the variable @code{p} would point to an invalid
	location when the command exists.


> > > > +However, if you were to type the following into @value{GDBN} after that
> > > > +command has completed:
> > > > +
> > > > +@smallexample
> > > > +compile code printf ("ff is %d\n'', ff);
> > > > +@end smallexample
> > > > +
> > > > +A compiler error would be raised as the variable @code{ff} no longer
> > > 
> > > Again, @noindend after the @example, and start "a compiler error" with
> > > a lower-case letter, as this is a continuation of the sentence before
> > > the example.
> > 
> > TBH I do not agree with this formatting as the previous sentence has been
> > terminated by its colon (':').
> 
> But then that previous sentence is incomplete, because it in effect
> goes like "If you were to type the following: SOMETHING."  A sentence
> with an "if" but no "then" part is incomplete.  I thought what follows
> the @example is the "then" part, which is why I suggested those
> changes.

OK, I agree now.


> OK, then let's say so explicitly.  Something like
> 
>   Types defined in the @code{compile} will no longer be available in
>   the next @code{compile} command.

I used it as you wrote.  Although I would write:
	Types defined in the @code{compile} command will no longer be
	available in the next @code{compile} command.


Thanks,
Jan