On 16/12/2013 17:38, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 12/16/2013 05:44 AM, Duncan wrote: >> Matt Turner posted on Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:34:13 -0800 as excerpted: >> >>> sse3: Use the SSE3 instruction set (pni in cpuinfo) >>> ssse3: Use the SSSE3 instruction set >> >> I'd suggest a parenthetical on ssse3 as well, something like: >> >> ssse3: Use the SSSE3 instruction set (NOT sse3, three s) >> >> I know that confused me for awhile, and I tend to be reasonably literate >> (as a user, anyway) on this sort of thing, > > Why not go all the way? > > "Enable use of the SSSE3 instruction set (NOT sse3). This is needed by > projects which contain assembly code or which use certain compiler > intrinsics. It is not a replacement for CFLAGS and friends."
The second and third sentences add nothing to the description. They only describe how cpu instruction sets in general work and are used, but tell you nothing about ssse3. I recommend a short expansion on what ssse3 is, and shortening the rest while retaining it's meaning, then modifying all cpu instruction set flags similarly > You can make a case for brevity, but how many times do you find yourself > (a) reading USE flag descriptions, and (b) thinking they're too long? It's possible to have a very verbose, and meaningless, description. be verbose by all means if the verbosity carries useful information -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
