diff mbox

documentation: clarify that Cilk Plus implementation is incomplete

Message ID alpine.LNX.2.00.1308181219270.2133@trevally.site
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Gerald Pfeifer Aug. 18, 2013, 10:21 a.m. UTC 
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> This is a small cleanup to the Cilk Plus mention in our documentation, 
> but more importantly, it clarifies that the Cilk Plus implementation in 
> GCC is only partial.
> 
> OK for trunk?

	* doc/invoke.texi (-fcilkplus): Clarify that implementation is
	incomplete.


No comma before "as the official".

And personally I would omit the last sentence, but it's fine to
keep if you really want to leave it.

Fine with these changes.

Thanks,
Gerald
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index dd82880..3150c8d 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -1804,13 +1804,17 @@  have support for @option{-pthread}.
 @item -fcilkplus
 @opindex fcilkplus
 @cindex Enable Cilk Plus
-Enable the usage of Cilk Language extension features for C/C++.  When the flag
-@option{-fcilkplus} is specified, all the Cilk Plus components are converted 
-to the appropriate C/C++ code.  The present implementation follows ABI version 
-0.9.  There are four major parts to Cilk Plus language 
-extension: Array Notations, Cilk Keywords, SIMD annotations and elemental 
-functions.  Detailed information about Cilk Plus can be found at 
-@w{@uref{http://www.cilkplus.org}}. 
+When the option @option{-fcilkplus} is specified, enable the usage of
+the Cilk Plus Language extension features for C/C++.  The present
+implementation follows ABI version 0.9.  This is an experimental
+feature that is only partially complete, and whose interface may
+change in future versions of GCC, as the official specification
+changes.  Currently only the array notation feature of the language
+specification has been implemented.  More features will be implemented
+in subsequent release cycles.
+
+Detailed information about Cilk Plus can be found at
+@w{@uref{http://www.cilkplus.org}}.

I would keep the first sentence as is, which is more in line how
we generally describe options.