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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[index] Add index of exposition-only library names. #3876

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[index] Add index of exposition-only library names. #3876

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

and index 'voidify'.

Fixes #3392.

This is based on #3873 and probably needs a rebase after merging the latter.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

jensmaurer commented Mar 16, 2020 •
edited

std-exposid.pdf

The index of exposition-only names is a bit weird. We have quite a few exposition-only data members that appear in the index, but whose names are not very interesting. And then, there are names such as STATICALLY-WIDEN or voidify or is-integer-like that are of more global interest. Maybe we should add those (few) names that are of global interest to the general library index (probably with an explicit marker "exposition-only" and in italics) and not add a separate index.

@zygoloid zygoloid added the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Oct 17, 2020
@zygoloid
Copy link
Member

I agree that many of these names don't seem useful to index. I suppose the question is which index they should go in: the general index or the index of library names. They're not library names, but people might look in that index anyway.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

jensmaurer commented Dec 4, 2020 •
edited

Editorial meeting: Have exposition-only concepts in the concept index (status quo). Have other exposition-only names (e.g. voidify) in the general library names index. Add intro text to say that italics names are exposition-only. Do not index exposition-only names used locally (e.g. class data members).

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Dec 4, 2020
@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Dec 14, 2020

@jensmaurer: Will you retool this PR accordingly (no new index, just integrate names into existing indexes)?

@tkoeppe tkoeppe removed the request for review from zygoloid December 14, 2020 17:15
@tkoeppe tkoeppe added the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Dec 14, 2020
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

jensmaurer commented Dec 14, 2020 •
edited

@tkoeppe: Sure, this is my pull request, and I got my marching orders.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Dec 14, 2020
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Fixed.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

@tkoeppe, I think this is now ready.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Mar 15, 2021

Thanks, let me just check this.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Mar 15, 2021

The meeting decision included, "Add intro text to say that italics names are exposition-only." Did you add any such text, or did it ultimately turn out not to be necessary?

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jun 23, 2021

@jensmaurer: sorry, I lost sight of this; could you take another look to see if this is still ready, and also see my last comment?

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Jun 23, 2021 •
edited

Oh, we probably need to add the couple of new expos-only names the last meeting added, as well as document this process in the wiki. Never mind, new text already uses the new macros and should thus be fine.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Jun 23, 2021
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Note to self: Add intro text saying that italics identifiers are exposition-only.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

The intro text was already there (intro for the library names index): "Names in italics are exposition-only library names."

@tkoeppe, this seems to be ready.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the changes requested Changes to the wording or approach have been requested and not yet applied. label Jul 6, 2021
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

@tkoeppe, ping.

@wg21bot wg21bot added the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Jan 19, 2022
@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Jan 19, 2022
@wg21bot wg21bot added the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Feb 6, 2022
@danra danra mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2022
Open
@JohelEGP JohelEGP mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2022
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

'voidify' is not indexed
4 participants
@jensmaurer @zygoloid @tkoeppe @wg21bot