From bf0a3968f5c3eab3f05793f7420d70df9e66acb0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 10:14:13 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] doc: Fixup a couple of formatting nits
I noticed a couple of places we used @code{program} instead of
@command{program}.
gcc/
* doc/invoke.texi: Replace a couple of @code with @command
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index 07232c6b33dc..02abac39de86 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ The usual way to run GCC is to run the executable called @command{gcc}, or
When you compile C++ programs, you should invoke GCC as @command{g++}
instead. @xref{Invoking G++,,Compiling C++ Programs},
for information about the differences in behavior between @command{gcc}
-and @code{g++} when compiling C++ programs.
+and @command{g++} when compiling C++ programs.
@cindex grouping options
@cindex options, grouping
@@ -14352,7 +14352,7 @@ Note that it is quite common that execution counts of some part of
programs depends, for example, on length of temporary file names or
memory space randomization (that may affect hash-table collision rate).
Such non-reproducible part of programs may be annotated by
-@code{no_instrument_function} function attribute. @code{gcov-dump} with
+@code{no_instrument_function} function attribute. @command{gcov-dump} with
@option{-l} can be used to dump gathered data and verify that they are
indeed reproducible.
--
GitLab