Based on a conversation with Joseph years ago.
gcc:
* doc/extend.texi (Attribute Syntax): Use @samp{=} instead of @code{=}.
(Extended Asm): Ditto.
---
gcc/doc/extend.texi | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index 8786249fb6f..00449bd9630 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -10026,7 +10026,7 @@ labelled in C90 or C99, so the ambiguity does not arise
there.
@subsubheading Enumerator Attributes
In GNU C, an attribute specifier list may appear as part of an enumerator.
-The attribute goes after the enumeration constant, before @code{=}, if
+The attribute goes after the enumeration constant, before @samp{=}, if
present. The optional attribute in the enumerator appertains to the
enumeration constant. It is not possible to place the attribute after
the constant expression, if present.
@@ -10108,7 +10108,7 @@ the @code{noreturn} attribute applies to all the
functions
declared; the @code{format} attribute only applies to @code{d1}.
An attribute specifier list may appear immediately before the comma,
-@code{=} or semicolon terminating the declaration of an identifier other
+@samp{=}, or semicolon terminating the declaration of an identifier other
than a function definition. Such attribute specifiers apply
to the declared object or function. Where an
assembler name for an object or function is specified (@pxref{Asm
@@ -11804,7 +11804,7 @@ stop:
The following artificial example shows an @code{asm goto} that sets
up an output only on one path inside the @code{asm goto}. Usage of
-constraint modifier @code{=} instead of @code{+} would be wrong as
+constraint modifier @samp{=} instead of @samp{+} would be wrong as
@code{factor} is used on all paths from the @code{asm goto}.
@example
--
2.45.0
