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.

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

Misc Editorial #1300

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 26, 2019
Merged

Misc Editorial #1300

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 26, 2019

Conversation

jmdyck
Copy link
Collaborator

@jmdyck jmdyck commented Sep 6, 2018

No description provided.

@jmdyck
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jmdyck commented Feb 10, 2019

Just added commits # 6-8.

@jmdyck
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jmdyck commented Feb 21, 2019

Just added commits # 9-20 re today's merges (#1346, #1274, #1275 , #1396).

@jmdyck
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jmdyck commented Feb 24, 2019

Just added commits # 21-26 re the merge of #697 three days ago.

@ljharb ljharb added the es2019 label Feb 26, 2019
@ljharb ljharb self-assigned this Feb 26, 2019
 - Editorial: drop annotations from non-def Async productions
    Mostly "[no LineTerminator here]", and a few "[lookahead != `{`]".
 - Editorial: swap order of RHSs in non-def productions
    ... so that they match the order of the corresponding RHSs in the defining production.
    (I think these were the only 2 places where this disorder occurred.)
 - Editorial: "_notifierEvent_" -> "_notifyEvent_" in NotifyWaiter
    because _notifierEvent_ isn't defined.
 - Editorial: merge two adjacent <emu-grammar> elements
    (It's the only such occurrence in the spec.)
    Merging them into a single element makes it easier
    to programmatically associate the following algorithm
    with both productions, rather than just the second.
 - Editorial: enforce space before param list in <h1>
 - Editorial: insert blank line between productions in a multi-production block.
 - Editorial: Delete annotations from 'use' productions
    (We almost never repeat gramatical annotations in non-defining productions.)
 - Editorial: change "Let" to "Set" in 3 places
 - Markup: Insert missing slash in end-tag
 - Editorial: Move 'Object.fromEntries' clause to its proper place in alphabetical order.
 - Editorial: Add underscores to parameter name
 - Markup: Use 'title' attribute in <emu-xref> element
    If we want the rendered text of a <emu-xref> element to be a clause-title,
    we usually just use the 'title' attribute. (Moreso in steps of this form.)
 - Editorial: add 'Return' for CreateDataPropertyOnObject
 - Editorial: Move 'Symbol.prototype.description' clause to its proper place in alphabetical order.
 - Editorial: delete extra space
 - Editorial: Change "a String value" to "the String value" since it's uniquely determined.
 - Editorial: Change "a code unit" to "the code unit" since it's uniquely determined.
 - Editorial: Change "or" to "or if"
    (In cases like this, we repeat the "if".)
 - Markup: Dissolve unnecessary <emu-xref>
    (The ecmarkup process will create the link automatically.)
 - Editorial: Fix some indentation
 - Editorial: Insert call to ReturnIfAbrupt
    ... because ClassDefinitionEvaluation can return abruptly.
 - Editorial: use 'string-concatentation'
 - Editorial: Change capitalization and xref target
    For "built-in Function object"...
    1) lower-case the "F", because we never use the capital in that phrase; and
    2) change the emu-xref target from
       `#sec-ecmascript-standard-built-in-objects` to `#sec-built-in-function-objects`
       because the former suggests that the phrase only refers to *standard* built-in functions,
       rather than *all* built-in functions.
 - Editorial: *name* -> `name`
    (We always use backticks for "the `name` property".)
 - Editorial: Insert "If Type(_func_) is Object and"
    ... because you shouldn't ask whether a value has a particular internal slot
    without first establishing that it's an object.
 - Markup: Add type="definition" to definition of NativeFunction
@jmdyck
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jmdyck commented Feb 26, 2019

Yay! Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants