On Mon, 18 May 2026, Alex Coplan wrote: > Hi all, > > Following the discussion here: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-May/716769.html > this expands the internal function documentation for IFN_MASK_LOAD to > spell out the signature of the function and explain how it relates to > the optab. > > The purpose of this RFC is mostly to agree on a style for documenting > IFNs in general, I just picked IFN_MASK_LOAD as it was a non-trivial > example that I am somewhat familiar with. > > As richi suggested, it also adds a clickable reference to the > corresponding optab documentation. > > Tested by building the html docs and eyeballing in a browser (checking > that the cross-reference works). > > Thoughts? If this style is OK, is it OK to commit and flesh out the > other entries incrementally?
LGTM, I can't comment on whether @anchor is appropriate or whether using the same as any @index entry works as well as reference (IIRC I got clickable links in pdfs that way?) And yes, incrementally improving documentation is OK! Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Alex > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * doc/ifn.texi (Direct Internal Functions): Flesh out > documentation for IFN_MASK_LOAD. > * doc/md.texi (Standard Names): Add anchor for maskloadmn so it > can be cross-referenced. > -- Richard Biener <[email protected]> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany; GF: Jochen Jaser, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich; (HRB 36809, AG Nuernberg)
