From 1a4eaf4f7cbef6e407fe49437c8176e1650baa88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Arnold D. Robbins" Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 21:39:01 +0300 Subject: Doc update about comments in pretty printing. --- doc/gawk.texi | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'doc/gawk.texi') diff --git a/doc/gawk.texi b/doc/gawk.texi index fb05d522..8c515a32 100644 --- a/doc/gawk.texi +++ b/doc/gawk.texi @@ -28331,7 +28331,12 @@ There is a significant difference between the output created when profiling, and that created when pretty-printing. Pretty-printed output preserves the original comments that were in the program, although their placement may not correspond exactly to their original locations in the -source code. +source code.@footnote{@command{gawk} does the best it can to preserve +the distinction between comments at the end of a statement and comments +on lines by themselves. Due to implementation constraints, it does not +always do so correctly, particularly for @code{switch} statements. The +@command{gawk} maintainers hope to improve this in a subsequent +release.} However, as a deliberate design decision, profiling output @emph{omits} the original program's comments. This allows you to focus on the -- cgit v1.2.3