-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 770
[lib] Subheadings in class descriptions #1242
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Comments
Editorial meeting consensus: Do not repeat a parent heading item in subordinate headings. |
Partially addresses cplusplus#1242.
Partially addresses cplusplus#1242.
@jensmaurer: What about [container.node]? |
@tkoeppe: [container.node] is odd. It specifies an exposition-only class node_handle, which need not exist under this name. Everywhere else in the vicinity, we specify requirements on classes or class templates by specifying the valid operations on them, instead of showing a class synopsis. I'd like to point out that the superordinate heading says "Node handles" and the subordinate headings say "node_handle", which is not exactly a repetition (although quite close). |
@jensmaurer: Yeah, that's true. Not sure what to do here. @zygoloid: Opinions? My primary goal here is to get rid of a bold-italic-teletype font requirement, which we cannot satisfy :-) |
I'm happy with removing |
Do you have a stance on the repetition in the headers' synopsis? That repetition might provide some context that's implicitly available in the subclauses for being nested. |
@JohelEGP, I don't understand the question. Header synopses usually say "Header <blah> synopsis", and that doesn't mention a class name. |
I mean the line comments like this: // [time.duration], class template duration
template<class Rep, class Period = ratio<1>> class duration; |
@JohelEGP, those comments quote the subclause heading, so those seem fine. |
This should be complete now. |
We have both:
-- blah constructors
(etc)
and
-- Construction and assignment [note: omitting "blah" in subordinate headings]
(etc)
[basic.string] is an example for the former, [string.view.template] is an example for the latter.
Which way is the "right" way?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: