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

[temp] Improve the overall definition of term "template" #425

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

FrankHB
Copy link
Contributor

@FrankHB FrankHB commented Dec 21, 2014

Variable templates should be listed alone.

Variable templates should be listed alone.
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
\indextext{type generator|see{template}}

\pnum
A \term{template} defines a family of classes or functions or an alias for a
A \term{template} defines a family of classes, functions or variables, or an alias for a
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please use the Oxford comma here: "a family of classes, functions, or variables, or an alias for a family of types." Right now, this can be misread as "defines (a family of classes), (functions or variables), or (an alias for a family of types)."

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed.

Fix ambiguity.
@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Apr 14, 2015

Can you please squash the commits?

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Dec 21, 2015

@FrankHB: Ping

@FrankHB
Copy link
Contributor Author

FrankHB commented Dec 23, 2015

@tkoeppe I tried fixing it by adding the additional comma, but now I think perhaps it would be better to list them alone. And should the static data members also be here?

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Dec 23, 2015

@FrankHB: That kind of high-level decision is not for me to make, @zygoloid is the responsible adult here. If you don't feel that the change is uncontroversially ready, maybe delete the PR and open an Issue instead to discuss whether there's a problem that needs to be solved and what the solution should look like?

A PR is unlikely to be an effective forum for discussing things like this; if a change isn't actually correct and desirable, it will probably just not get any attention here.

@FrankHB
Copy link
Contributor Author

FrankHB commented Dec 24, 2015

Opened #593 instead.

@FrankHB FrankHB closed this Dec 24, 2015
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

3 participants