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

Let code wrap in tables. #186

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 24, 2020
Merged

Let code wrap in tables. #186

merged 3 commits into from
May 24, 2020

Conversation

rkirsling
Copy link
Member

Replacement for tc39/ecma262#1844. Resolves tc39/ecma262#1843.

To repeat my earlier argument here for good measure:

[This] should only apply when we've actually run out of width to work with, and has the nice benefit of being responsive if your window is a bit too narrow.

We don't actually need to restrict this to tables-in-notes but it currently suffices to do so.

@michaelficarra
Copy link
Member

I don't see why we should restrict it to notes. It may save us from having to address this again in the future, and it doesn't hurt the rendering currently, right?

@rkirsling
Copy link
Member Author

@michaelficarra I agree—@ljharb, would you be okay with this?

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Mar 31, 2020

On premise it seems fine; it'd be good to see if there's any actual rendering differences.

@rkirsling rkirsling changed the title Let code wrap in tables-in-notes. Let code wrap in tables. Mar 31, 2020
@rkirsling
Copy link
Member Author

Looking through all of the tables currently in ECMA-262, the only one that's not in a note that's affected by this is Table 42, and just when responding to a restricted viewport width:

image

This feels pretty positive to me.

@bakkot bakkot merged commit edf571a into tc39:master May 24, 2020
@rkirsling rkirsling deleted the code-wrapping branch May 24, 2020 04:04
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.

Table 48 doesn't fit on the page
4 participants