Re: [PATCH] doc: Fix docs for -dD regarding predefined macros
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 18:31, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > I can't bisect that far, supposedly predefined macros weren't included back > > in 1996 when this was written but maybe it changed in 1999 or even earlier. > > It looks like this changed in 3.0 (so probably with the move to cpplib to > provide the default preprocessor implementation), but I don't know why. Ah, thanks for narrowing it down. I'll push the doc change tomorrow.
Re: [PATCH] doc: Fix docs for -dD regarding predefined macros
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I can't bisect that far, supposedly predefined macros weren't included back > in 1996 when this was written but maybe it changed in 1999 or even earlier. It looks like this changed in 3.0 (so probably with the move to cpplib to provide the default preprocessor implementation), but I don't know why. -- Joseph S. Myers josmy...@redhat.com
Re: [PATCH] doc: Fix docs for -dD regarding predefined macros
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 04:16:00PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > OK for trunk? > > Or am I missing something and the docs are right? (sometimes? always?) > > > -- >8 -- > > The manual has always claimed that -dD differs from -dM by not > outputting predefined macros, but that's untrue. It has been untrue > since at least GCC 3.2 and probably even older. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * doc/cppopts.texi: Remove incorrect claim about -dD not > outputting predefined macros. LGTM. I can't bisect that far, supposedly predefined macros weren't included back in 1996 when this was written but maybe it changed in 1999 or even earlier. Jakub
[PATCH] doc: Fix docs for -dD regarding predefined macros
OK for trunk?
Or am I missing something and the docs are right? (sometimes? always?)
-- >8 --
The manual has always claimed that -dD differs from -dM by not
outputting predefined macros, but that's untrue. It has been untrue
since at least GCC 3.2 and probably even older.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/cppopts.texi: Remove incorrect claim about -dD not
outputting predefined macros.
---
gcc/doc/cppopts.texi | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/cppopts.texi b/gcc/doc/cppopts.texi
index fa8f3d88c89..5b5b0848ae8 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/cppopts.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/cppopts.texi
@@ -524,8 +524,7 @@ interpreted as a synonym for @option{-fdump-rtl-mach}.
@opindex dD
@item -dD
-Like @option{-dM} except in two respects: it does @emph{not} include the
-predefined macros, and it outputs @emph{both} the @samp{#define}
+Like @option{-dM} except that it outputs @emph{both} the @samp{#define}
directives and the result of preprocessing. Both kinds of output go to
the standard output file.
--
2.43.2
