Editorial: use conventional notation for referring to types in Tables 4 and 5 #3371
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
Sorry, something went wrong.
michaelficarra
force-pushed
the
essential-internal-methods-signatures
branch
from
21ba07e to
b6f03a8
Compare
|
From editor call, we think that this shouldn't be a table in the first place, which will give us freedom to keep names and use our regular headers for describing their types. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It makes it a little more verbose, but the table layout stays acceptable IMO.