Skip to content

Conversation

@cgay
Copy link
Member

@cgay cgay commented Mar 7, 2025

No description provided.

cgay added 2 commits March 6, 2025 19:05
This module only exported _some_ of the other modules in the collections library, just
creating a potential for confusion. Instead we should decide whether to export one module
or many. The easy choice is to remove the convenience module, which was a late addition.

- :type:`<byte>`

.. <byte> is defined in the dylan library but documented here (for reasons?).
Copy link
Member

@housel housel Mar 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's defined in the dylan library because it's referenced by language extensions and implementation details that have to be there. It's not documented with the dylan library because it's not defined in the DRM.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Right, I was a bit lazy with that comment and I'll remove it.

I was basically wondering why we don't document it in dylan-extensions directly instead of somewhere that it is re-exported from.

Various minor corrections and additions to the docs, plus remove some of the methods from
the table of contents if they have no additional documentation other than their
specializer types.  This follows the recent change to sphinx-extensions that added all
Dylan definitions to the ToC.
@cgay cgay merged commit bfc563f into dylan-lang:master Mar 7, 2025
2 of 3 checks passed
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.

2 participants