|
00:01
finanalyst joined
|
|||
| arkiuat | argh, more noise on PR #4718; I forgot that a new commit would automatically attach to my most recent open PR, so I backed that out until I know better what I'm doing, and won't resubmit it until the old PR is closed. (Was trying to start the PR for issue #3881 on leap seconds.) | 00:15 | |
|
00:43
arkiuat left
00:50
arkiuat joined
02:39
arkiuat left
02:51
arkiuat joined
02:57
arkiuat left
03:10
arkiuat joined
07:22
finanalyst left
07:23
finanalyst joined
08:00
arkiuat left
08:14
arkiuat joined
08:19
arkiuat left
08:31
arkiuat joined
08:40
arkiuat left
08:51
arkiuat joined
08:57
arkiuat left
09:24
arkiuat joined
09:29
arkiuat left
09:57
arkiuat joined
10:02
arkiuat left
10:30
arkiuat joined
10:35
arkiuat left
10:58
arkiuat joined
11:03
arkiuat left
11:15
arkiuat joined
11:19
arkiuat left
11:36
finanalyst left
11:42
arkiuat joined
11:47
arkiuat left
12:15
arkiuat joined
12:28
arkiuat left
12:51
arkiuat joined
12:56
arkiuat left
13:20
arkiuat joined
13:25
arkiuat left
13:42
finanalyst joined
13:43
arkiuat joined
14:18
finanalyst left
|
|||
| arkiuat | [Coke], I rephrased the code example in the gist so that it shows aligned columns without violating the comment-formatting rules. | 14:29 | |
| so we won't need to have that separate discussion about NL vs actual newlines | 14:30 | ||
| [Coke] | cool | 14:47 | |
| anything ready for merging? | |||
| arkiuat | yes, I think PR #4718 is ready for merging | 15:00 | |
| when I started pushing commits on the leap-second issue, they automatically attached to 4718, so I'm holding off until that one is closed one way or the other | 15:01 | ||
| I guess this is what I should be using distinct branches for, huh | |||
| [Coke] | ... if you use the same branch, that'll happen | ||
| Yes. | |||
| arkiuat | right, gotcha. I was trying to fall back and simplify my usage because I had been getting confused with the more elaborate setup, and this has been educational! | 15:02 | |
| so I'll starting naming distinct branches again, without trying to have a triangular remote set-up (at least not yet, anyway) | 15:03 | ||
|
15:58
arkiuat left
16:12
arkiuat joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | would it be easier to give you commit bits but still review prs? | 16:15 | |
| Happy to do so | |||
| arkiuat | I'm actually not sure. It would probably speed up my learning curve though, so I'm inclined to say yes | 16:39 | |
|
17:04
disbot3 joined
17:08
disbot2 left
17:09
disbot3 left,
disbot4 joined
|
|||
| Geth | doc: arkiuat++ created pull request #4720: Issue 3881, type/Instant & type/DateTime |
17:15 | |
| arkiuat | I just tried creating a branch and checking in the changes for issue 3881 for it, BUT the new pull request that was created included all the main-branch commits for the old PR | 17:17 | |
| so I closed the new PR right away. I don't think I can move forward until we deal with PR #4718, but I won't be making this particular mistake again | |||
| Geth | doc: timo++ created pull request #4721: Clarification on &done and &emit |
17:25 | |
|
17:31
timo joined
|
|||
| Geth | doc/sub-done-and-emit-clarifications: d2b9f8168e | (Timo Paulssen)++ | doc/Type/independent-routines.rakudoc Clarification on &done and &emit emit and done use control exceptions so you don't have to lexically place them inside a react or supply block. Also mention the LAST phaser in whenver blocks is like the done named argument to method tap. Also, calling &done will return from the supply or react block. |
17:33 | |
| timo | oops, i think that needs an additional change to account for a change in 6.d | 17:42 | |
| no, i misread something that was only about whenever blocks themselves | 17:43 | ||
| Geth | doc/mention-lock-async-in-concurrency-page: eb825ceb8d | (Timo Paulssen)++ | doc/Language/concurrency.rakudoc Mention Lock::Async in language/concurrency |
18:05 | |
| doc: timo++ created pull request #4722: Mention Lock::Async in language/concurrency |
18:06 | ||
| timo | arkiuat: you can prevent more commits from appearing in your latest pull request by making a separate branch in your own repository for each pull request | 18:13 | |
| Geth | doc/main: c747ce59f0 | timo++ (committed using GitHub Web editor) | doc/Language/concurrency.rakudoc Mention Lock::Async in language/concurrency (#4722) |
18:17 | |
| [Coke] | your new branches need to be off main | 18:18 | |
| guessing you new-branched off the-thing-you-were-just-working-on | |||
| Geth | doc/main: cde810e389 | (Eric Forste)++ (committed using GitHub Web editor) | 2 files deepmap/duckmap/nodemap, issues #4560 & #4711 (#4718) * addressed issue #4711 with minimal changes Added a mention of the third example to smooth the abrupt transition, and selected only one example of either method or sub call as most appropriate for each. ... (6 more lines) |
18:20 | |
| doc: arkiuat++ created pull request #4723: Instant, DateTime: discuss leap seconds per issue 3881 |
19:14 | ||
| arkiuat | timo, yep, [Coke] and I had already discussed that. I had gotten myself all tangled up trying to set up a triangular remote workflow, and in falling back from that and simplifying, I forgot that I still need to name branches | 19:24 | |
| won't be doing that again | |||
| thanks | |||
| anyway, I seem to have gotten that all cleared up and the newest PR is done properly | 19:25 | ||
|
20:10
arkiuat left
20:23
arkiuat joined
20:49
arkiuat left
21:10
finanalyst joined
21:11
arkiuat joined
21:20
arkiuat left
21:30
arkiuat joined
21:39
arkiuat left
22:02
arkiuat joined
22:07
arkiuat left
22:19
arkiuat joined
22:24
arkiuat left
22:37
arkiuat joined
23:42
arkiuat left
23:56
arkiuat joined
|
|||