Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[class.derived] Don't bother splitting last remark in note off into separate paragraph. #1240

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 14, 2016

Conversation

Eelis
Copy link
Contributor

@Eelis Eelis commented Dec 14, 2016

While I think this change is definitely merited on its own, its real significance is that it gets rid of the very last (as far as I can tell) multi-paragraph note in the document, thereby fixing half of #781.

@@ -147,16 +147,13 @@
a derived class and its base class subobjects can be represented by a
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Capitalize beginning of note.

@@ -147,16 +147,13 @@
a derived class and its base class subobjects can be represented by a
directed acyclic graph (DAG) where an arrow means ``directly derived
from''. A DAG of subobjects is often referred to as a ``subobject
lattice''.
lattice''. The arrows need not have a physical representation in memory.
Copy link
Contributor

@tkoeppe tkoeppe Dec 14, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd delete "The" and just say "Arrows need not...".

The association changes subtly here: the sentence is now about general graph theory, not about the figure. I think that's fine, though if you wanted to continue using this sentence to explain the figure, I'd add something like "Figure {X} shows {Y}; the arrows [in that figure] ..."

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, sorry, I re-pushed before addressing this second review comment. I'll address this one too.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've moved the sentence about the arrows not being physical to directly after the sentence where the arrows are first introduced. The association does indeed change, but I agree that's fine, especially with this rearrangement.

@Eelis Eelis force-pushed the multiparamnotes branch 2 times, most recently from da9491c to 1f0eba7 Compare December 14, 2016 16:50
directed acyclic graph (DAG) where an arrow means ``directly derived
from''. A DAG of subobjects is often referred to as a ``subobject
lattice''.
from''. The arrows need not have a physical representation in memory.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd still change it to either "An arrow" or "Arrows", non?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess I read it as "The arrows [in the DAG just described] need not ...", but I'm fine with "An arrow" or "Arrows", too :)

@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit 7b087da into cplusplus:master Dec 14, 2016
@Eelis Eelis deleted the multiparamnotes branch December 14, 2016 17:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants