From ecf4b2ce2a5178392d02e2ec7cde5232fbe8fc07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nick Schonning Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 00:45:20 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] fix: MD037/no-space-in-emphasis Spaces inside emphasis markers --- meetings/2014/LDM-2014-02-17.md | 6 +++--- meetings/2014/LDM-2014-10-01.md | 2 +- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-02-17.md b/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-02-17.md index 78a6439..b4fbb5f 100644 --- a/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-02-17.md +++ b/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-02-17.md @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ Open question: should you be allowed a separator before the numeric-type-suffix? # 11. Binary literals -*Approved. Already in preview. Aligns with C# vNext feature "binary literals" * +*Approved. Already in preview. Aligns with C# vNext feature "binary literals"* It will be nice for enum literals. F# has them. We would ask the debugger to consider displaying stuff in binary as well, but that’s lower priority. ``` vb @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ It will be nice for enum literals. F# has them. We would ask the debugger to con Note: Integer.TryParse is a language-neutral .NET Framework function, that should not be augmented just for sake of new language-syntax. So we wouldn't want to make it work with the above syntax. # 12. Multiline strings -*Approved. Already in preview. Parity with C#. * +*Approved. Already in preview. Parity with C#.* ``` vb Dim x = "Hello @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ But it's better than nothing, and brings more regularity into the language. # 16. on autoprops -*Approved. Aligns with C# vNext feature "field target on autoprops" * +*Approved. Aligns with C# vNext feature "field target on autoprops"* ``` vb property x As Integer event e As Action diff --git a/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-10-01.md b/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-10-01.md index 09b3621..b6d1e35 100644 --- a/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-10-01.md +++ b/meetings/2014/LDM-2014-10-01.md @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ _Resolution: Option4_. This is the most helpful to developers. You might wonder __Piecewise initialization of structs__. In the code above, do we allow `z.z1 = 15` to assign to the _field_ of a readonly struct autoprop? _Option1:_ Yes by threating access to "z" for purposes of definite assignment as an access of the underlying field. -_Option2: _ No because in `z.z1` the read of `z` happens via the accessor as per the principle above, and thus returns an rvalue, and hence assignment to `z.z1` can't work. Instead you will have to write `z = new Z(...)`. +_Option2:_ No because in `z.z1` the read of `z` happens via the accessor as per the principle above, and thus returns an rvalue, and hence assignment to `z.z1` can't work. Instead you will have to write `z = new Z(...)`. _Resolution: Option2_. If we went with Option1, then readonly autoprops would end up being more expressive than settable autoprops which would be odd! Note that in VB you can still write `_z.z1 = 15` if you do want piecewise assignment. __Virtual__. What should happen if the readonly autoprop is virtual, and its getter is overridden in a derived class?