From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua1-x92e.google.com (mail-ua1-x92e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92e]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAD8F3858D28 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 16:26:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org BAD8F3858D28 Received: by mail-ua1-x92e.google.com with SMTP id a20so1293686uaq.11 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2022 09:26:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AyODihojDJTCBdUn9UKWCUGu5Ch9omNsWJMvb3bE2po=; b=mJwJEx9odj1/S9CzNYFBR1H7LApVGALhYn+taU6SqHrR6blE6W14+VZzYM03GiMgh7 UQpQxIw9OGxbFuRVWd/rE/Ke3+JWsJvwMgavxj6BX19GociQTfRw32QcpzJY66fn4dK/ lTwcITqmGHkcOe1Q/9UWy/enmlpIqWOtOGLAU5T9dT0bdWyO6k9nzoajQWVj9qYQpL1w xHHrah6Ibb4JT5DXS38E1t9e9WgjWZ4ETzbdqUSsL/toHu2Dbz4+aKlVU7HU50Ocscwi B7Ino2OHf/z9mXCKO8dAJcsKkLqi6YGz2DEbIOzuhRn+q8iZa4md2sw9IVEvOKowYKiy Iyiw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530rFUDPPkfFNwwID9vc5H/4WS4SmZn2K+R+qKNRLMLFnvs9AcZk gxNG0QfStzTVF3QjDW6/y5HcLHWCBMICtjaTy9ldRg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxR5uARXvMaoJxhAT7eDJ642XxHw+AoKrGO8+4RsPnjJkB93lk29neYpb/fJE77Cq5zX+KDaiYEj3kOiKXwy00= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:3caa:0:b0:359:9a0c:d1b7 with SMTP id a42-20020ab03caa000000b003599a0cd1b7mr4423199uax.74.1648830418023; Fri, 01 Apr 2022 09:26:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220401132734.234720-1-dmalcolm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20220401132734.234720-1-dmalcolm@redhat.com> From: Eric Gallager Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 12:26:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [committed] jit: further doc fixes To: David Malcolm Cc: gcc-patches , jit@gcc.gnu.org, Petter Tomner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, GIT_PATCH_0, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: jit@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Jit mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 16:27:00 -0000 On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:28 AM David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Further jit doc fixes, which fix links to > gcc_jit_function_type_get_param_type and gcc_jit_struct_get_field. > > I also regenerated libgccjit.texi (not included in the diff below). > > Tested with "make html" and with a bootstrap. Could you test with `make pdf` and `make dvi` too, to see if this fixes 102824? https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102824 > Committed to trunk as r12-7959-g1a172da8a3f362. > > gcc/jit/ChangeLog: > * docs/topics/expressions.rst: Fix formatting. > * docs/topics/types.rst: Likewise. > * docs/_build/texinfo/libgccjit.texi: Regenerate > > Signed-off-by: David Malcolm > --- > gcc/jit/docs/topics/expressions.rst | 8 ++++---- > gcc/jit/docs/topics/types.rst | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/jit/docs/topics/expressions.rst b/gcc/jit/docs/topics/expressions.rst > index 9267b6d2ad6..d51264af73f 100644 > --- a/gcc/jit/docs/topics/expressions.rst > +++ b/gcc/jit/docs/topics/expressions.rst > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Rvalues > ------- > .. type:: gcc_jit_rvalue > > -A :c:type:`gcc_jit_rvalue *` is an expression that can be computed. > +A :c:type:`gcc_jit_rvalue` is an expression that can be computed. > > It can be simple, e.g.: > > @@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ Function calls > gcc_jit_rvalue_set_bool_require_tail_call (gcc_jit_rvalue *call,\ > int require_tail_call) > > - Given an :c:type:`gcc_jit_rvalue *` for a call created through > + Given an :c:type:`gcc_jit_rvalue` for a call created through > :c:func:`gcc_jit_context_new_call` or > :c:func:`gcc_jit_context_new_call_through_ptr`, mark/clear the > call as needing tail-call optimization. The optimizer will > @@ -721,8 +721,8 @@ where the rvalue is computed by reading from the storage area. > > #ifdef LIBGCCJIT_HAVE_gcc_jit_lvalue_set_tls_model > > -.. function:: void > - gcc_jit_lvalue_set_link_section (gcc_jit_lvalue *lvalue, > +.. function:: void\ > + gcc_jit_lvalue_set_link_section (gcc_jit_lvalue *lvalue,\ > const char *section_name) > > Set the link section of a variable. > diff --git a/gcc/jit/docs/topics/types.rst b/gcc/jit/docs/topics/types.rst > index 9779ad26b6f..c2082c0ef3e 100644 > --- a/gcc/jit/docs/topics/types.rst > +++ b/gcc/jit/docs/topics/types.rst > @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ A compound type analagous to a C `struct`. > > A field within a :c:type:`gcc_jit_struct`. > > -You can model C `struct` types by creating :c:type:`gcc_jit_struct *` and > +You can model C `struct` types by creating :c:type:`gcc_jit_struct` and > :c:type:`gcc_jit_field` instances, in either order: > > * by creating the fields, then the structure. For example, to model: > @@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ Reflection API > Given a function type, return its number of parameters. > > .. function:: gcc_jit_type *\ > - gcc_jit_function_type_get_param_type (gcc_jit_function_type *function_type, > + gcc_jit_function_type_get_param_type (gcc_jit_function_type *function_type,\ > size_t index) > > Given a function type, return the type of the specified parameter. > @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ Reflection API > alignment qualifiers. > > .. function:: gcc_jit_field *\ > - gcc_jit_struct_get_field (gcc_jit_struct *struct_type, > + gcc_jit_struct_get_field (gcc_jit_struct *struct_type,\ > size_t index) > > Get a struct field by index. > -- > 2.26.3 >