[Bug-gnupress] Sec 16 and 17 proofreading

[Dan Colascione]

Pretty good. Patch follows.

diff -ur doc/bugreport.texi doc-modified/bugreport.texi
--- doc/bugreport.texi  2003-04-06 18:55:04.000000000 -0400
+++ doc-modified/bugreport.texi 2003-04-25 13:24:41.000000000 -0400
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
 send you a patch and ask you to tell us whether it works.
 
 In order for a bug report to serve its purpose, you must include the
-information that makes for fixing the bug.
+information necessary to find and fix the bug.
 
 @menu
 * Criteria:  Bug Criteria.   Have you really found a bug?
@@ -64,8 +64,8 @@
 If the compiler produces valid assembly code that does not correctly
 execute the input source code, that is a compiler bug.
 
-However, you must double-check to make sure, because you may have a
-program whose behavior is undefined, which happened by chance to give
+However, you must double-check to make sure that this is the case. You may 
have a
+program whose behavior is undefined that by chance gives
 the desired results with another C or C++ compiler.
 
 For example, in many nonoptimizing compilers, you can write @samp{x;}
diff -ur doc/compat.texi doc-modified/compat.texi
--- doc/compat.texi     2002-10-11 19:58:31.000000000 -0400
+++ doc-modified/compat.texi    2003-04-25 12:26:58.000000000 -0400
@@ -152,5 +152,5 @@
 it is necessary to tell @command{g++} the location and name of that
 library.  It might also be necessary to specify different startup files
 and other runtime support libraries, and to suppress the use of GCC's
-support libraries with one or more of the options @option{-nostdlib},
+support libraries with one or more of the options: @option{-nostdlib},
 @option{-nostartfiles}, and @option{-nodefaultlibs}.
Only in doc-modified/: gcc.log
diff -ur doc/gcov.texi doc-modified/gcov.texi
--- doc/gcov.texi       2003-04-12 18:05:13.000000000 -0400
+++ doc-modified/gcov.texi      2003-04-25 14:23:11.000000000 -0400
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
 @command{gcov} helps you determine where to work on optimization.
 
 Software developers also use coverage testing in concert with
-testsuites, to make sure software is actually good enough for a release.
+testsuites to make sure software is actually good enough for a release.
 Testsuites can verify that a program works as expected; a coverage
 program tests to see how much of the program is exercised by the
 testsuite.  Developers can then determine what kinds of test cases need
@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@
 
 @item -c
 @itemx --branch-counts
-Write branch frequencies as the number of branches taken, rather than
+Write branch frequencies as the number of branches taken rather than
 the percentage of branches taken.
 
 @item -n
@@ -220,9 +220,9 @@
 nearest non-boundary value.
 
 When using @command{gcov}, you must first compile your program with two
-special GCC options: @samp{-fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage}.
-This tells the compiler to generate additional information needed by
-gcov (basically a flow graph of the program) and also includes
+special GCC options: @option{-fprofile-arcs} and @option{-ftest-coverage}.
+These tell the compiler to generate additional information needed by
+gcov (basically, a flow graph of the program) and also include
 additional code in the object files for generating the extra profiling
 information needed by gcov.  These additional files are placed in the
 directory where the object file is located.
@@ -353,12 +353,12 @@
 
 If you plan to use @command{gcov} to help optimize your code, you must
 first compile your program with two special GCC options:
address@hidden -ftest-coverage}.  Aside from that, you can use any
-other GCC options; but if you want to prove that every single line
-in your program was executed, you should not compile with optimization
-at the same time.  On some machines the optimizer can eliminate some
-simple code lines by combining them with other lines.  For example, code
-like this:
address@hidden and @option{-ftest-coverage}. Aside from these,
+you can use any other GCC options, but if you want to prove that every
+single line in your program was executed, you should not compile with
+optimization at the same time. On some machines, the optimizer can
+eliminate some simple code lines by combining them with other lines. For
+example, code like this:
 
 @smallexample
 if (a != b)
diff -ur doc/trouble.texi doc-modified/trouble.texi
--- doc/trouble.texi    2003-01-24 10:52:58.000000000 -0500
+++ doc-modified/trouble.texi   2003-04-25 13:16:52.000000000 -0400
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@
 @section Cross-Compiler Problems
 
 You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines,
-for several reasons.
+for several reasons:
 
 @itemize @bullet
 @item
@@ -110,15 +110,15 @@
 files generated by another C++ compiler.
 
 An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling.  The use
-of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle
+of different name mangling is intentional and is intended to protect you from 
more subtle
 problems.
 Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation,
-including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
+including how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
 implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled.  If the name
 encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries
 provided from other compilers---but the programs would then crash when
-run.  Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than
-at run time.
+run.  With different name mangling, incompatible libraries are then
+detected at link time, rather than at run time.
 
 @item
 Older GDB versions sometimes fail to read the output of GCC version
@@ -147,10 +147,10 @@
 of the child process to clobber those of the parent.  Because of this,
 programs that call @code{vfork} are likely to lose when compiled
 optimized with GCC when the child code alters registers which contain
-C variables in the parent.  This affects variables which are live in the
+C variables in the parent.  This bug affects variables which are live in the
 parent across the call to @code{vfork}.
 
-If you encounter this, you can work around the problem by declaring
+If you encounter this bug, you can work around the problem by declaring
 variables @code{volatile} in the function that calls @code{vfork}, until
 the problem goes away, or by not declaring them @code{register} and not
 using @option{-O} for those source files.
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@
 the HP assembler.  GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
 
 @item
-In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
+In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions, you may
 receive errors from the HP linker complaining about an out of bounds
 unconditional branch offset.  This used to occur more often in previous
 versions of GCC, but is now exceptionally rare.  If you should run
@@ -750,7 +750,7 @@
 variable when it writes debugging information.
 
 You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the
-executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
+executable and your source code when you use optimization.
 
 @cindex conflicting types
 @cindex scope of declaration
@@ -1297,7 +1297,7 @@
 Strictly speaking, there is no prohibition in the ISO C standard
 against allowing structures with volatile fields in registers, but
 it does not seem to make any sense and is probably not what you wanted
-to do.  So the compiler will give an error message in this case.
+to do.  The compiler will give an error message in this case.
 
 @item
 Making certain warnings into errors by default.
@@ -1341,9 +1341,9 @@
 Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure
 that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete
 features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++.  Many
-warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the @option{-W}
-options (for instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
-warnings).
+warnings are issued only if you ask for them with one of the @option{-W}
+options. (For instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
+warnings.)
 
 @opindex pedantic
 @opindex pedantic-errors


-- 
"Use what talents you possess: the woods would be very silent if no
birds sang there except those that sang best." -- Henry Van Dyke
"Si in Googlis non est, non est." http://truffula.net:9999/

pgpJWGg_yj0Ei.pgp
Description: PGP signature