| Geth | doc/test/type-layout: 21f0901a4b | (Will Coleda)++ | doc/Type/Metamodel/ParametricRoleGroupHOW.rakudoc Fix pod error Found by t/25-type-rakudoc.rakutest |
03:21 | |
| doc/test/type-layout: 947b3d6c19 | (Will Coleda)++ | t/25-type-rakudoc.rakutest Each type must have a declaration ... some of these fail. |
|||
| [Coke] | Metamodel::ParametricRoleGroupHOW is documented, but the real class seems to have a Perl6:: prefix | 03:53 | |
| Geth | doc/test/type-layout: 7c37200388 | (Will Coleda)++ | doc/Type/Metamodel/ParametricRoleGroupHOW.rakudoc test clean |
03:55 | |
| doc-website/main: 4f94d00e7b | habere-et-dispertire++ (committed using GitHub Web editor) | Website/plugins/listfiles/_listf-styling.scss [Typo] xlarge => x-large (#518) developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W.../font-size |
10:06 | ||
| doc-website: finanalyst self-assigned Search has 'wb>' as a target github.com/Raku/doc-website/issues/513 jeevanabhi-r++ created pull request #520: Fix routines link on new website homepage |
11:05 | ||
| ¦ doc-website: finanalyst self-assigned Create a dockerfile & image for testing github.com/Raku/doc-website/issues/521 | 13:47 | ||
| doc/test/type-layout: c13c74cb8b | (Will Coleda)++ | t/25-type-rakudoc.rakutest Validate Type doc formatting ... require =head1 Methods (many failures here) |
16:41 | ||
| [Coke] | FYI, there's over 100 failures on this test right now, liz. :| | ||
| that said, the test has found one pod error, where we had like ":for code" instead of "=for code" | 16:42 | ||
| (of course, now that code isn't compiling. :) | 16:46 | ||
| lizmat | [Coke]: understood, will fix | 16:47 | |
| [Coke] | Not asking you to fix anything yet, most of those failures are on legacy pages. :) | 16:48 | |
| but: feel free to make edits on that branch for the AST pages if you want to catch anything there so far. | 16:49 | ||
| lizmat | ack | ||
| doing a review of $!storage use atm :-) | |||
| [Coke] | yah, don't worry about docs right now | ||
| afk | |||
| Question for editing on a page like docs.raku.org/type/Range - there is a head1 Methods, followed by many head2 individual methods. | 17:42 | ||
| but there are also several subs at the end at the same level as the methods. | |||
| and, "worse"? Those are all operator subs. | 17:43 | ||
| Should we have a second head1 for Operators? | |||
| Or change head1 methods to "Routines" as has been used in some locations in the docs. | 17:44 | ||
| Any other options? I'm leaning towards head1 methods (required), head1 operators (optional) | |||
| (and we might mark even methods as optional on some type pages. | 17:45 | ||
| lizmat | I guess being multi-paradigm is biting us there | ||
| I'm not really sue the infix ops should be there at all | 17:46 | ||
| *sure | |||
| [Coke] | OK. I don't know how many types have those. | 17:47 | |
| lizmat | I mean, they're not really functions of Range, they just happens to be dealing with Ranges | ||
| [Coke] | just spot-checking test failures right now | ||
| lizmat | *happen | ||
| [Coke] | I mean, that seems relevant to have them on the page. | ||
| We're only listing the Range related ones. | 17:48 | ||
| lizmat | well, what about infix:<..> and friends then ? | ||
| [Coke] | they are described in the opening paragraph, but not as head2s down below. | 17:56 | |
| even if we took out the head2s, we'd still leave that. (does it mean we also describe this one in a hypotethical operators section? probably, but just with a pro forma note see above. | |||
|
18:16
[Coke] left
20:14
[Coke] joined
|
|||