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

Hard to read code in Example 8.10 due to split caused by Figure 8.3 #398

Closed
cniethammer opened this issue Dec 10, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed
Assignees
Labels
chap-topologies Process Topologies Chapter Committee editor change Changes to be made by the document editor

Comments

@cniethammer
Copy link

cniethammer commented Dec 10, 2020

Problem

Figure 8.3 is placed inside Example 8.2 and splits the code at a page boundary with page flip making the actual code hard to read.

Proposal

Move figure 8.3 before or after example 8.10 as it is properly referenced in the example text.

Changes to the Text

None

Impact on Implementations

None

Impact on Users

Improved readability

@cniethammer cniethammer added the chap-topologies Process Topologies Chapter Committee label Dec 10, 2020
@wesbland wesbland added this to Triage in MPI 4.0 Ratification via automation Dec 15, 2020
@wesbland wesbland added editor change Changes to be made by the document editor mpi-4.0 labels Dec 15, 2020
@wesbland wesbland moved this from Triage to To Do for MPI 4.0 in MPI 4.0 Ratification Dec 16, 2020
@wgropp
Copy link

wgropp commented Jan 8, 2021

I don't see this is the most recent version of the RC. This may have been fixed by the change to encapsulate the examples. If I'm missing the problem, let me know by Jan 10th. Otherwise, I'll close this.

MPI 4.0 Ratification automation moved this from To Do for MPI 4.0 to Done Jan 11, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
chap-topologies Process Topologies Chapter Committee editor change Changes to be made by the document editor
Projects
No open projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants