From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 8IyiHkM8SmTLoDcAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:11:31 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 70CB01E221; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:11:31 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=pII3A5vG; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D2A91E0D3 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9107385840D for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:11:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C9107385840D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1682586688; bh=xRJM1qQYjL8KXVRJtBSzr0WJpFRK+ERADVsDkkdzhNQ=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=pII3A5vG9262DBkKt8VoZzggJRQlhpvBO7BajSw1GIJsa0fSuH4E2vNz6SccT1dc0 UcfmLaBrE+jK/yQDCohCqeFB5K9fxuNIO2sU9Lk7vctMZLTNh6U0auqOWZ5j64EsS/ 0nCrHOS17lT0lHritco2LtbdmS+9h1n5rkrquuM0= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B490F3858C31 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:10:13 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B490F3858C31 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1prxdk-0000we-Tm; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:10:12 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1prxdk-00027d-4J; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:10:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:10:43 +0300 Message-Id: <83y1mdsnak.fsf@gnu.org> To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <11f9bfb1-78cb-80db-fbc6-3262f0f9fdae@arm.com> (message from Luis Machado on Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:35:15 +0100) Subject: Re: [PATCH,v3 17/17] [gdb/docs] sme: Document SME registers and features References: <20230411042658.1852730-18-luis.machado@arm.com> <20230417171945.328823-1-luis.machado@arm.com> <83ttx81dcc.fsf@gnu.org> <83bkjatyi2.fsf@gnu.org> <11f9bfb1-78cb-80db-fbc6-3262f0f9fdae@arm.com> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:35:15 +0100 > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > From: Luis Machado > > >>> This should use @var, not @code. Also, I'd remove the whitespace > >>> around "x". > >> > >> Fixed. But I used spaces between "x" and the two @var entries because it gets rendered as a single > >> block of characters like svlxsvl. > > > > That doesn't seem possible, since @var produces a different typeface: > > slanted in the printed version and CAPS in the Info versions. Where > > did you see svlxsvl? > > In the PDF. I mean, it is slanted with the use of @var{}, but not that noticeable. > > See the attached pdf. I also attached the info file. Then maybe use "@var{svl} by @var{svl}"? > I noticed the info file capitalizes @var{}, which might not be ideal? That cannot be helped. It isn't ideal, indeed, but given that Info manuals must be displayed on plain-text terminals, there's not a lot Texinfo can play with.