Skip to content

Collection immutable (3): filled in @param, @tparam, and @return tags that were missed last time#26121

Draft
bvenners wants to merge 1 commit into
scala:mainfrom
artimahub:scaladoc-tags-collection-immutable-cleanup
Draft

Collection immutable (3): filled in @param, @tparam, and @return tags that were missed last time#26121
bvenners wants to merge 1 commit into
scala:mainfrom
artimahub:scaladoc-tags-collection-immutable-cleanup

Conversation

@bvenners
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

As a next step in improving the Scaladoc documentation for the Scala 3 standard library, this PR fills in @param, @tparam, and @return tags for scala.collection.immutable that were missed in the previous batch of PRs. I'm submitting it as a draft PR so to get CI to run on it, to see if it breaks anything, and to start getting feedback. We automated the generation of these changes and are starting to review them. We will review them all before making the PR non-draft. Please let me know if you see anything specific that you think could be improved.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cheeseng cheeseng left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comments added.

*
* @param start the first value of the new range
* @param end the upper bound of the new range (inclusive or exclusive, matching the original range)
* @param end the end boundary of the new range (inclusive or exclusive, matching this range)
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the wording should be consistent with start, if we use 'first value' for start then we should use 'last value' for end, if we use 'end boundary' for end, then I think we should use 'start boundary' for start.

*
* @tparam A the element type of the lazy list
* @param state the by-name expression computing the initial state of the lazy list
* @param state the by-name expression that, when forced, produces the lazy list
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To be honest I have never seen the use of word 'forced' on by-name, not sure if it is right?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants