diff mbox series

[PATCHJ] : Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities

Message ID 85f1c762-b348-4bdd-2265-24b04643c8e0@jguk.org
State Accepted
Headers
Series [PATCHJ] : Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities |

Checks

Context Check Description
snail/gcc-patch-check success Github commit url

Commit Message

Jonny Grant March 1, 2023, 12:54 p.m. UTC 
  Hello
I don't have write access, could someone review and apply this please?
Kind regards
Jonny



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [PATCHJ]: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 21:00:05 +0000
From: Jonny Grant <jg@jguk.org>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org


2022-12-26  Jonathan Grant <jg@jguk.org>
	* gcc/doc/extend.texi: Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify online manual infelicities
	

>From 8b142ad8973dc67289e197e30966490a944e4819 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Grant <jg@jguk.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 20:58:29 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Bugzilla 88860 - Clarify gcc online manual infelicities

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Grant <jg@jguk.org>
---
 gcc/doc/extend.texi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Jeff Law March 11, 2023, 4:37 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 3/1/23 05:54, Jonny Grant wrote:
> Hello
> I don't have write access, could someone review and apply this please?
Done.  Edited the ChangeLog a bit and pushed to the trunk.

Thanks,
jeff
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index adba057c190..88fc625050b 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -9190,7 +9190,7 @@  have to optimize it to just @code{return 42 + 42;}.
 This section describes the syntax with which @code{__attribute__} may be
 used, and the constructs to which attribute specifiers bind, for the C
 language.  Some details may vary for C++ and Objective-C@.  Because of
-infelicities in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
+limitations in the grammar for attributes, some forms described here
 may not be successfully parsed in all cases.
 
 There are some problems with the semantics of attributes in C++.  For