documenting command-line options (was Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default)

2016-11-18 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 11/18/2016 11:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: [snip] I think it would be be ideal if all the options were sorted the same way in all sections. Is there some command to have texinfo sort them for us? If not, can we write a script to sort them, either each time just before generating the docs or

Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default

2016-11-18 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/18/2016 11:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: I think it would be be ideal if all the options were sorted the same way in all sections. Is there some command to have texinfo sort them for us? If not, can we write a script to sort them, either each time just before generating the docs or

Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default

2016-11-18 Thread Martin Sebor
On 11/18/2016 10:38 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 11/18/2016 09:01 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch. I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input

Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default

2016-11-18 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 11/18/2016 09:01 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch. I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i.e., documented the negative of the option

Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default

2016-11-18 Thread Martin Sebor
On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch. I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i.e., documented the negative of the option rather than the positive; thank you for the

Re: PING [PATCH] enable -fprintf-return-value by default

2016-11-17 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch. I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i.e., documented the negative of the option rather than the positive; thank you for the review, btw.) On 11/08/2016 08:13 PM, Martin Sebor