Richard Biener <[email protected]> writes: > The following adds a skeleton for documenting internal function details. > Without such a place it's quite difficult to tell people to document > things when they add new internal functions. We might want to split > the table into two, separating direct internal functions from others.
Yeah, agree that separating them sounds good. The original idea for direct internal functions was that they would be simple wrappers around optabs, which are documented in md.texi. Using references to md.texi sounds better than trying to duplicate each entry. But there are now some direct internal functions for which the optab mapping is less than obvious. I suppose useful information for direct ifns would be: - a sample call, just to establish names, e.g. "res = foo(a, b)" - the underlying optab - where the modes of the optab come from - the operands to the optab, possibly using pseudo functions to process things like pointer/type pairs - which arguments are constant Although that sounds more like a json file. Not sure how easy it would be to present in texinfo... Thanks for doing this. Richard
