--- Mer 11.3.09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> But they aren't documented in the user manual. I think
> they should be, just as we document the machine specific
> constraint characters in the user manual.
> I think it would be appropriate to open a bug report about this.
>
> Ian
http://gcc.gnu.org
Andreas Schwab writes:
> Etienne Lorrain writes:
>
>> Well, do I have any chance to have the 'asm (" %c0 ": : "" );' and
>> 'asm (" %a0 ": : "" );' documented if I submit a bug report?
>
> Those are already documented (*note (gccint)Output Template::).
But they aren't documented in the user ma
Etienne Lorrain writes:
> Well, do I have any chance to have the 'asm (" %c0 ": : "" );' and
> 'asm (" %a0 ": : "" );' documented if I submit a bug report?
Those are already documented (*note (gccint)Output Template::).
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint =
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Anything not documented there is likely to change or be removed in the
> future, so you should not rely on it. On the other hand, if you find
> some behaviour that you feel should be documented and it is not,
> please submit a documentation patch (or at least open a b
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
> Could you please point me
> the "under the hood" features you think may be interesting for
> me? I mean (presumming that there are) the extended type info,
> class layout description (e.g. in order to implement reflections
> and GC), the __cx
> Well, the problem is that I don't know where to find the "unofficial"
> documentation, so it is hard to figure out the questions to be asked.
Well, the unofficial documentation is the source code. :->
Paolo
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Anyway, the documentation is there http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/
Yes, this is the official documentation I read frequently.
> Anything not documented there is likely to change or be removed
> in the future, so you should not rely on it.
I can afford the process of
2009/3/9 Piotr Wyderski :
>
> Having said that, I wonder what else can I win by sticking to
> the GNU compiler as closely as possible. There is a lot of
> officially documented extensions (computed gotos, attributes,
> PMF conversions etc.) I am aware of (and I continuously monitor
> the list), but
