[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gnu-prog-discuss] An experimental GNU Assembly

From: Thien-Thi Nguyen
Subject: Re: [gnu-prog-discuss] An experimental GNU Assembly
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:26:43 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

() Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
() Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:18:58 -0500


   I don't see any harm in including these in ChangeLog entries too.

      ENTRY-CONVENTIONS describe entry-specific abbreviations or
      implicitly shared descriptions.  For example, instead of this:

   No harm in that either, but I usually deal with the same situation
   by writing "Likewise" or just putting several functions into
   one line.  Instead of

     Here, all C files now #include "header.h";
     "U" means "Use ‘func’".
     * foo.c (foo): U.
     * bar.c (bar, baz): U.
     (qux): Update call to ‘bar’.
     * doc.texi (ref): Mention "header.h".

   I used to write it like this:

     * header.h: Include in all C files.
     * foo.c (foo): Use `func’.
     * bar.c (bar, baz): Likewise.
     (qux): Update call to ‘bar’.
     * doc.texi (ref): Mention "header.h".

   I think that is clearer in practice but I don't object to the other
   way.  This text is meant for humans to read, not for automatic
   parsing.  The only crucial thing is to list the functions that are
   changed, to make searching for them reliable.

Thanks for the review.  I believe i've addressed your points in
another message, and redirected to another list (CC updated).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]