texi: un-comment indices. #60
Merged
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
emixa-d
requested changes
Jul 23, 2022
fibers.texi
Outdated
| @c @unnumbered Function Index | ||
| @c @printindex fn | ||
| @node Concept Index | ||
| @unnumbered Concept Index |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think including an index while it's still empty is a bit silly, but IMO go ahead with the rest!
I would like some confirmation from another reviewer on the location though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(it can easily be re-added once there's actually some things inside)
|
I re-commented the unused concept index.
…--
Hugo Hörnquist
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 12:36:45PM -0700, emixa-d wrote:
@emixa-d commented on this pull request.
> @@ -1389,11 +1389,11 @@ Guile now has a solid concurrency story. Use fibers, incorporate it
directly into your project, fork it, improve it: what happens now is
up to you. Happy hacking and godspeed!
***@***.*** @node Concept Index
***@***.*** @Unnumbered Concept Index
***@***.*** @printindex cp
***@***.*** @node Function Index
***@***.*** @Unnumbered Function Index
***@***.*** @printindex fn
***@***.*** Concept Index
***@***.*** Concept Index
(it can easily be re-added once there's actually some things inside)
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#60 (comment)
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
Looks like there are some errors, according to the CI, could you fix them? |
|
I couldn't recreate the warning locally, but hopefully this fixes it. |
emixa-d
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 2, 2023
This effectively merges #60, with the following changes: The commit ‘un-comment indices’ was in the future (time-wise) and previously (commit history) mostly duplicated in: commit 36a6cc7 Author: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> Date: Mon Feb 6 14:43:20 2023 +0100 doc: Add index. * fibers.texi (Index): New node. without mentioning the previous (time-wise) PR #60. The difference between the PR and this commit is that it appears to merge the function and concept index. Another difference: it's squashed. * fibers.texi (Index): Don't mention concepts in the menu.
|
I've rebased it in #95. Assuming no negative review (and assuming I don't forget), I intend to merge it after 5 days. |
This effectively merges wingo#60, with the following changes: The commit ‘un-comment indices’ was in the future (time-wise) and previously (commit history) mostly duplicated in: commit 36a6cc7 Author: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> Date: Mon Feb 6 14:43:20 2023 +0100 doc: Add index. * fibers.texi (Index): New node. without mentioning the previous (time-wise) PR wingo#60. The difference between the PR and this commit is that it appears to merge the function and concept index. Another difference: it's squashed. * fibers.texi (Index): Don't mention concepts in the menu.
emixa-d
added
enhancement
approved
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.
I see no reason for not rendering the index that already is there.
The concept index is currently also empty, but I enabled it to in case something gets added to it later.