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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Are standard.md and cleanup-instructions.md required in the standard directory? #33

Closed
jskeet opened this issue Nov 18, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #36
Closed

Are standard.md and cleanup-instructions.md required in the standard directory? #33

jskeet opened this issue Nov 18, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #36
Labels
type: process This issue relates to processes

Comments

@jskeet
Copy link
Contributor

jskeet commented Nov 18, 2020

In the new repository, we have the following files:

  • README.md - contains the TOC for the Standard
  • standard/standard.md - contains the TOC in a slightly different format
  • standard/cleanup-instructions.md - contains instructions for working with the Standard, but they may be out of date

My current "generate a Word doc" script expects all .md files in the standard directory to be part of the standard.

I'd at least suggest moving the cleanup-instructions.md file to the root directory or under admin - or deleting entirely. (I think it's outdated.)

As for standard.md - the Word converter has some problems with it, which I can probably address, but it's not clear whether it's actually useful. Let's discuss that before I put effort in :)
(The StandardAnchorTags tool rewrites README.md but not standard.md - I don't know whether it's been updated to handle the standard directory.)
@jskeet jskeet added type: process This issue relates to processes meeting: discuss This issue should be discussed at the next TC49-TG2 meeting labels Nov 18, 2020
@jskeet
Copy link
Contributor Author

jskeet commented Nov 18, 2020

Resolution: delete both files.

@jskeet jskeet self-assigned this Nov 18, 2020
@RexJaeschke RexJaeschke removed the meeting: discuss This issue should be discussed at the next TC49-TG2 meeting label Nov 19, 2020
@RexJaeschke
Copy link
Contributor

On the 2020-11-18 telcon, we agreed to remove these. Jon will make a PR.

jskeet added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2020
@jskeet
Delete extraneous markdown files
f022da8 
These aren't required for the Standard, and confuse the Word converter

Fixes #33.
@jskeet jskeet mentioned this issue Nov 19, 2020
Merged
BillWagner pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2020
@jskeet
Delete extraneous markdown files (#36)
91222d5 
These aren't required for the Standard, and confuse the Word converter

Fixes #33.
gafter pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 19, 2022
Split out ref struct from #33.
0bd2dfd
BillWagner pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 13, 2023
@BillWagner
Split out ref struct from #33.
4ec8347
BillWagner pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 8, 2023
@BillWagner
Split out ref struct from #33.
452938f
BillWagner added a commit that referenced this issue May 19, 2023
@gafter @BillWagner
@jskeet @Nigel-Ecma
C# 7.x: ref struct (#601)
d02b208 
* Split out `ref struct` from #33.

* Add ref safety rules as they apply to ref structs

Declare that `ref structs` have a *ref_safe_scope* that matches their initializing expressions. Restrict copying of a `ref struct` (by value) to its *ref_safe_scope*. Then, define what the *ref_safe_scope* is depending on the initializing expression.

* forgot to finish one sentence.

* Add note on iterators and async methods

The previous normative language was

* respond to review feedback.

* Respond to meeting feedback, part 1

Respond to all meeting feedback *except* updating the rules on *safe_to_escape*.

That's coming in the next commit.

* incorporate safe rules.

Pull all safety rules related to safe-scope from PR on ref variables
into the section on ref structs.

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* respond to feedback.

* Update per 5/17 committee meeting.

* update definition

* found one more comment to address

---------

Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <nmgafter@fb.com>
Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>
BillWagner added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 7, 2023
@BillWagner @jskeet
@Nigel-Ecma @gafter @RexJaeschke @KalleOlaviNiemitalo
Merge all features related to C# 7 ref features (#795)
1718a86 
* Add rules for `ref` safety (#742)

* first pass at safety rules

This mostly incorporates the feature spec language.

* Add rule for `out` parameters

Out parameters have a ref safe to escape scope of the current method, not the calling method.

* Add readonly rule.

* fix headers

no code fences in headers

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <skeet@pobox.com>

* updates from reviews

Updates from code review

* style fix

* respond to feedback

Ref like fields do have storage, but that storage may refer to a variable that is a struct parameter or varialbe.

* respond to feedback

Respond to existing feedback.

* Introduce definitions

Introduce better definitions for the "lifetime" of reference variables. I avoided the term "lifetime' because of its runtime connotation. Instead, I used the "scope" where a "variable declaration" is valid.

From there, next define the safe scopes and the ref safe scopes for different variable classifications.

Finally, I shortened the terms *safe-to-escape-scope* and *ref-safe-to-escape-scope* to "*safe-scope* and *ref-safe-scope*. The text doesn't make it clear why the "escape" term is used, and it doesn't seem to add clarity.

* add examples

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <skeet@pobox.com>

* address review comments

This addresses most of the comments in the most recent reviews.

The next commit will make an attempt to use a single term for *ref_safe_scope*.

* Remove *safe_scope* rules

Once I push these, I'll add notes about which rules must be added to #601

* Update standard/variables.md

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* Update standard/variables.md

* Respond to review comments.

* Feedback from April meeting

This include comments, and fixing the formatting after consulting with Rex.

* remove ref struct descriptions

These belong in the PR for ref structs, and in the section on ref structs.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <skeet@pobox.com>

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* remove missing xref

This needs to be added to #213 once this PR is merged.

* Updates from 5/17 meeting.

Updates from the 5/17 meeting.

* fix build warning

---------

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <skeet@pobox.com>
Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* C# 7.x: ref struct (#601)

* Split out `ref struct` from #33.

* Add ref safety rules as they apply to ref structs

Declare that `ref structs` have a *ref_safe_scope* that matches their initializing expressions. Restrict copying of a `ref struct` (by value) to its *ref_safe_scope*. Then, define what the *ref_safe_scope* is depending on the initializing expression.

* forgot to finish one sentence.

* Add note on iterators and async methods

The previous normative language was

* respond to review feedback.

* Respond to meeting feedback, part 1

Respond to all meeting feedback *except* updating the rules on *safe_to_escape*.

That's coming in the next commit.

* incorporate safe rules.

Pull all safety rules related to safe-scope from PR on ref variables
into the section on ref structs.

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* respond to feedback.

* Update per 5/17 committee meeting.

* update definition

* found one more comment to address

---------

Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <nmgafter@fb.com>
Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* C# 7.x: ref locals and returns (#213)

* Update expressions.md

* Update statements.md

* Update classes.md

* Update delegates.md

* Relocate ('ref' 'readonly'?)? to local_variable_declaration

I had this grammar extension in the wrong place

* Add support for ref readonly iteration variables to foreach

* Minor tweak to v7 spec for ? ref : ref

* build fixes

* fix merge error

* one more build issue

* light editing

* fix section references

* fix link errors

* edit to address feedback, link to ref safety rules.

* fix markdown lint error

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* respond to feedback

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* Update per April meeting feedback.

* formatting while checking grammar

* updates from 5/17 committee meeting.

* remove blank line.

* fix warnings

---------

Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* C# 7.x: in parameter mode (#219)

* Update basic-concepts.md

* Update variables.md

* Update conversions.md

* Update structs.md

* Update interfaces.md

* Update delegates.md

* Update unsafe-code.md

* Update documentation-comments.md

* Update classes.md

* Update expressions.md

* include support for local functions

* fix merge tag

* fix build warnings

* build fixes

* build fixes, round 1

* build fixes, part 2

* one last link fix

* light edits based on earlier feedback.

* respond to remaining feedbac,.

* one final edit....

* clarification on `ref` extension methods

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* respond to feedback

* Update standard/expressions.md

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* Update standard/expressions.md

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* Update per April meeting notes.

* respond to feedback.

* Exclude dynamic implicit conversions

A dynamic expression can't be passed as an `in` parameter if an implicit conversion is required.

* Clarify restrictions on `in` parameters

Dynamically bound expressions can't use the `in` modifier.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <neal@gafter.com>

* Updates from 5/17 committee meeting.

* fix warning

---------

Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <neal@gafter.com>

* C# 7.x: Add initializer list to `stackalloc` (#238)

* Update unsafe-code.md

* Update unsafe-code.md

* Move most of stackalloc spec from unsafe to here

* Impact of moving most of stackalloc spec from unsafe to expressions

* Moved most of stackalloc spec to expressions

* Fix links to new stackalloc spec location

* Add Span & ReadOnlySpan types

* fix build issues

* address feedback

* Stack initializers are only allowed as local variable initializers

This clarifies and simplifies some of the language for this PR.

* fix markdown lint issue

* respond to feedback.

* fix build issues

* one more round of build issues

* respond to feedback.

* decisions from 5/17 meeting.

* add safe context rules.

---------

Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>

* fix build warnings

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* fix references

* add closing backticks

One grammar rule was missing the closing backticks.

This caused several build errors.

* respond to feedback through clause 15 (classes)

This commit responds to feedback with the 👍 emoji through clause 15.

* respond to feedback.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* rearrange conditional specification

* Update standard/expressions.md

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* Update standard/variables.md

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* edits based on feedback.

* Update standard/expressions.md

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>

* respond to feedback comments

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* more feedback

* Update standard/classes.md

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* Update standard/classes.md

Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>

* Update standard/expressions.md

* Update standard/expressions.md

* Update standard/expressions.md

Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>

* Update standard/variables.md

* edits during the meeting.

* Update standard/expressions.md

Co-authored-by: KalleOlaviNiemitalo <kon@iki.fi>

* edits, part 1

* respond to meeting discussion and feedback

Address all remaining conversations for this PR.

Addresses feedback from 06/05/2023 ECMA committee meeting.

---------

Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <skeet@pobox.com>
Co-authored-by: Nigel-Ecma <perryresearch@zoot.net.nz>
Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <neal@gafter.com>
Co-authored-by: Neal Gafter <nmgafter@fb.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Skeet <jonskeet@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Rex Jaeschke <rex@RexJaeschke.com>
Co-authored-by: KalleOlaviNiemitalo <kon@iki.fi>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
type: process This issue relates to processes
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Delete extraneous markdown files dotnet/csharpstandard
2 participants
@jskeet @RexJaeschke