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

Clarify that options and attributes are unordered #751

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 26, 2024
Merged

Conversation

eemeli
Copy link
Collaborator

@eemeli eemeli commented Mar 25, 2024

Closes #749.
See #716 for context.

@eemeli eemeli added syntax Issues related with MF Syntax fast-track Non-spec editorial changes, etc. formatting labels Mar 25, 2024
@eemeli eemeli added this to the Technical Preview (CLDR v45) milestone Mar 25, 2024
Copy link
Member

@aphillips aphillips left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A couple of comments.

spec/syntax.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ the following steps are taken:

#### Option Resolution

The result of resolving _option_ values is a mapping of string identifiers to values.
The result of resolving _option_ values is an unordered mapping of string identifiers to values.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This might be too strong. An implementation would not be incorrect to order the options internally--that would be an implementation detail. What's important is that functions cannot count on the ordering or make the ordering significant.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has that effect. It's still possible for an implementation to use a container that retains order to represent the options, but with this qualifier functions can't rely on that.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm trying to be parsimonious about what we change. The existing text doesn't say anything about order, thus you can't count on it (especially since we disallow ordering elsewhere). But I can live with this.

@eemeli eemeli requested a review from aphillips March 26, 2024 17:11
@aphillips aphillips merged commit f6fb396 into main Mar 26, 2024
1 check passed
@aphillips aphillips deleted the unorder-options branch March 26, 2024 17:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
fast-track Non-spec editorial changes, etc. formatting syntax Issues related with MF Syntax
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Explicitly say that the order of options has no meaning
4 participants