January 20
On Saturday, 19 January 2019 at 21:08:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/19/2019 7:54 AM, Johan Engelen wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 15 January 2019 at 11:25:03 UTC, Sebastian Wilzbach wrote:
>>> On 2019-01-14 18:04, Petar via Dlang-internal wrote:
>>>> On Monday, 14 January 2019 at 14:42:50 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>   I'd like to have a terminology page for the spec.
>>>>> At the moment, I am thinking about clearly describing terms like "implementation-defined behavior" and "undefined behavior", because there is so much confusion about it. I'm sure we'll run across more terms that need proper explanation (possibly referring to another location in the spec).
>>>>
>>>> It seems you're looking for this page: https://dlang.org/glossary.
>>>
>>> The glossary is isn't part of the spec and the spec is bundled as e.g. ebook and pdf for offline usage.
>> 
>> OK, I'll try to add a page to the spec and populate it with (part of) that glossary page, thanks for the pointer.
>
> Why create a new page? Seems like a better solution is to include the glossary with the spec.

People can decide later on whether to remove the glossary page from dlang.org.
The two pages have somewhat different goals: the page in the spec is going to be precise, whereas I guess the current glossary page is meant to help the casual reader of dlang.org. (the current glossary page is somewhat poor at the former)
But I actually find it pretty strange to have a glossary page in the location where it is now, so you have my vote to remove it there.

-Johan

January 20
On 1/20/2019 8:28 AM, Johan Engelen wrote:
> People can decide later on whether to remove the glossary page from dlang.org.
> The two pages have somewhat different goals: the page in the spec is going to be precise, whereas I guess the current glossary page is meant to help the casual reader of dlang.org. (the current glossary page is somewhat poor at the former)
> But I actually find it pretty strange to have a glossary page in the location where it is now, so you have my vote to remove it there.

Whatever is done with the glossary page, there should be only one glossary page. I certainly don't want two - a precise one and a dumbed down one. Have one, and have that be the precise one.
Next ›   Last »
1 2