Hello
I don't have write access, could someone review and apply this please?
Kind regards
Jonny
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [PATCHJ]: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 21:00:05 +0000
From: Jonny Grant <j...@jguk.org>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
2022-12-26 Jonathan Grant <j...@jguk.org>
* gcc/doc/extend.texi: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual
infelicities
>From 8b142ad8973dc67289e197e30966490a944e4819 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Grant <j...@jguk.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 20:58:29 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify gcc online manual infelicities
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Grant <j...@jguk.org>
---
gcc/doc/extend.texi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index adba057c190..88fc625050b 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -9190,7 +9190,7 @@ have to optimize it to just @code{return 42 + 42;}.
This section describes the syntax with which @code{__attribute__} may be
used, and the constructs to which attribute specifiers bind, for the C
language. Some details may vary for C++ and Objective-C@. Because of
-infelicities in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
+limitations in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
may not be successfully parsed in all cases.
There are some problems with the semantics of attributes in C++. For
--
2.37.2
