On 15/11/18 17:52 -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I've checked in this patch for PR 25759, another minor documentation
improvement.
I'll commit this patch as obvious as soon as svn stops being slow.
I wonder if the last sentence would be further improved by simply
saying "not on a @code{typedef} that does not also define the type"
instead of spelling out the kinds of types for a second time.
commit 546daacf7086b3f7b79ba067f4660b912ba28a09
Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Nov 19 09:39:33 2018 +0000
Fix typos in packed attribute documentation
* doc/extend.texi (Common Type Attributes): Fix typos.
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index d230da977d4..0dff5e86ed1 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -7317,7 +7317,7 @@ or @code{__pointer__} for the mode used to represent pointers.
@item packed
@cindex @code{packed} type attribute
-This attribute, attached to @code{struct}, @code{union}, or C++ @code{class}
+This attribute, attached to a @code{struct}, @code{union}, or C++ @code{class}
type definition, specifies that each of its members (other than zero-width
bit-fields) is placed to minimize the memory required. This is equivalent
to specifying the @code{packed} attribute on each of the members.
@@ -7349,7 +7349,7 @@ struct __attribute__ ((__packed__)) my_packed_struct
@};
@end smallexample
-You may only specify the @code{packed} attribute attribute on the definition
+You may only specify the @code{packed} attribute on the definition
of an @code{enum}, @code{struct}, @code{union}, or @code{class},
not on a @code{typedef} that does not also define the enumerated type,
structure, union, or class.
