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

[container.opt.reqmts] Index 3-way compare for containers #6220

Merged

Conversation

AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor

All of the standard containers are 3-way comparable, but the specification is provided under optional container requirements so does not show up in the index.

Adding these links shows just how poorly indexed the members of the 'flat_*' container adapters are, but that is properly the business on a separate PR.

All of the standard containers are 3-way comparable, but the
specification is provided under optional container requirements
so does not show up in the index.

Adding these links shows just how poorly indexed the members of
the 'flat_*' container adapters are, but that is properly the
business on a separate PR.
source/containers.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
AlisdairM and others added 2 commits April 4, 2023 12:54
Co-authored-by: Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña <johelegp@gmail.com>
This form seems a closer match to how the other container
requirements operations are indexed, where we get just one
generic entry in the index for "optional container requirements"
and a specific entry for the operator on each listed container.
@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we now have two options: the original version of the PR, or the current state where I use a local macro to index all operations with a grouped text-name, while retaining the correct indexing in each container.

@tkoeppe @jensmaurer @jwakely could you express a preference?

source/containers.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña <johelegp@gmail.com>
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

The current state with \indexcont seems what we do elsewhere in the container requirements sections, so I'd say "squash and merge" as-is.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Nov 8, 2023

@jwakely Any thoughts?

source/containers.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Wakely <github@kayari.org>
@tkoeppe tkoeppe merged commit c7fb99f into cplusplus:main Nov 8, 2023
2 checks passed
@AlisdairM AlisdairM deleted the index_three_way_compare_for_containers branch November 14, 2023 19:19
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

5 participants