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

fix tuple.dd and ctarguments.dd (issue 14879) #1052

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

aG0aep6G
Copy link
Contributor

@aG0aep6G aG0aep6G commented Aug 6, 2015

Fix link to std.typecons.tuple.
Add ctarguments.dd to make files so that ctarguments.html gets built.
Add missing parenthesis in ctarguments.dd.
Add TITLEs to tuple.dd and ctarguments.dd.
Add ctarguments.html to the menu.

Fixes issue 14879 - tuple documentation broken link.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14879

Fix link to std.typecons.tuple.
Add ctarguments.dd to make files so that ctarguments.html gets built.
Add missing parenthesis in ctarguments.dd.
Add TITLEs to tuple.dd and ctarguments.dd.
Add ctarguments.html to the menu.

Fixes issue 14879 - tuple documentation broken link.
)

Macros:
TITLE=Compile-Time Lists
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We usually indent macros.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done

@MartinNowak
Copy link
Member

ctarguments needs to be updated to match the smaller std.meta change we have right now.
Also AliasSeq instead of Arguments.

@aG0aep6G
Copy link
Contributor Author

aG0aep6G commented Aug 8, 2015

ctarguments needs to be updated to match the smaller std.meta change we have right now.
Also AliasSeq instead of Arguments.

This made me remember that there's #1038 which aims to improve the ctarguments article, including any naming updates. This PR and #1038 have some overlap, but this one is focused on getting things working, not on the content. So I'd leave AliasSeq vs Arguments and similar things to #1038.

@MartinNowak
Copy link
Member

replaced by #1038

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants