Re: [rfa/doc] correct info about best C++ compilers/debug formats

["Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il>]

> From: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
> Date: 03 Feb 2003 10:27:30 -0800
> 
> * Eli: Is the TeXinfo okay?

Yes, except that there's a typo in the last sentence: "debugg".  (I
recommend "M-x ispell-region RET" after you change something in the
manuals.)

>   What about the choice of cindex entries?
>   When I actually looked at the index, I found that it generated three
>   consecutive entries "C++ and ..." that all pointed at the same
>   place

Right, it is not useful to have multiple index entries which all start
with the same string and point to the same place.

>   I'm tempted to get rid of the C++ and GCC entry, since that's
>   really a special case of C++ and compilers.

I suggest the following index entries:

  @cindex debugging C@t{++} programs
  @cindex C@t{++} compilers
  @cindex debug formats and C@t{++}
  @cindex @value{NGCC} and C@t{++}

Thanks!