Re: annotate.texi

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at delorie dot com>]

> > Is there any reason why annotate.texi shouldn't be @include'd by
> > gdb.texinfo and be part of the manual?  Right now, "set annotate" is
> > not documented at all, and annotate.texi seems to be just what the
> > doctor ordered...
>
> I just wonder if we want to encourage its use :-)

Any user who types "gdb --help" will see the --annotate switch
advertised, and will want to know what that does.  Without
annotate.texi in the manual, this switch cannot be documented
properly.  The same goes for the "set annotate" command.  I think
undocumented features should be generally avoided.

Here's a case in point.  I'm going through the test suite trying to
make sure the DJGPP version passes all the tests.  When I bumped into
the test which tests annotations, I wanted to know what does that
command do.  Naturally, I looked it up in gdb.info, and when that
failed in gdbint.info.  You can guess what I found ;-).

In other words, undocumented features in the long run haunt
maintainers as well.

If we want to discourage use of --annotate, we can say that explicitly
in the manual.

Comments?