2013/4/29 Ian Lance Taylor <iant@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 3:24 PM, dw <limegreensocks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I'm not sure what constitutes a "formal review" for gcc. Is this something >> driven by the doc maintainers? Actually, I'm kinda surprised not to have >> heard from them. > > They probably haven't seen them. As described at > http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html , patches are normally sent to > gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx. I guess there is a typo? There should be "patches are normally sent to gcc-patches@xxxxxxxxxxx"~ :p > Many GCC developers do not read gcc-help. > > That said, this is an area that few GCC developers know well. > > Ian Hi, dw, I also suggest to CC maintainer who is in charge of the area when you are submitting patches to the gcc-patches@xxxxxxxxxxx. Refer to the file MAINTAINERS under gcc source tree for details. Sometimes maintainers may be too busy to give response quickly. If you do not receive a response within two weeks or so, it is also a good idea to 'PING' the mail so that people can keep chasing it. The content and style you re-wrote for inline asm documentation is great. Thank you for the effort to make it better and it does help reading. Certainly some refinement need to be done back and forth with others suggestion. I am looking forward to see your patch can be eventually approved after refinement. :) Best regards, jasonwucj
