docs: add interactive vs batch distinction to UX guidelines

gcc/ChangeLog:
	* doc/ux.texi: Add subsection contrasting interactive versus
	batch usage of GCC.

1 files changed, 25 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gcc/doc/ux.texi b/gcc/doc/ux.texi
index fdba5da..28d5994 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/ux.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/ux.texi
@@ -86,6 +86,31 @@ information to allow the user to make an informed choice about whether
 they should care (and how to fix it), but a balance must be drawn against
 overloading the user with irrelevant data.
 
+@subsection Sometimes the user didn't write the code
+
+GCC is typically used in two different ways:
+
+@itemize @bullet
+@item
+Semi-interactive usage: GCC is used as a development tool when the user
+is writing code, as the ``compile'' part of the ``edit-compile-debug''
+cycle.  The user is actively hacking on the code themself (perhaps a
+project they wrote, or someone else's), where they just made a change
+to the code and want to see what happens, and to be warned about
+mistakes.
+
+@item
+Batch rebuilds: where the user is recompiling one or more existing
+packages, and GCC is a detail that's being invoked by various build
+scripts.  Examples include a user trying to bring up an operating system
+consisting of hundreds of packages on a new CPU architecture, where the
+packages were written by many different people, or simply rebuilding
+packages after a dependency changed, where the user is hoping
+``nothing breaks'', since they are unfamiliar with the code.
+@end itemize
+
+Keep both of these styles of usage in mind when implementing diagnostics.
+
 @subsection Precision of Wording
 
 Provide the user with details that allow them to identify what the