On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I'm happy for that latest patch to be committed, thanks for taking the
> time to improve the comments.
Committed.
Thanks!
--
Regards,
Tim Shen
On 28 October 2013 00:23, Tim Shen wrote:
> Thank you for figuring out so many syntax errors, I'll be careful next time.
No problem, I'm always happy to help review the grammar, syntax or
spelling in documentation improvements.
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>> +
Thank you for figuring out so many syntax errors, I'll be careful next time.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> + // The order of which states needs to be recursively applied DFS matters,
> + // depend on which greedy mode we use.
>
> I don't understand this sentence at a
+ // This function serves in different modes, DFS mode or BFS mode, indicated
+ // by template variable __dfs_mode. See _M_main for details.
I think this would make more sense if you replace "serves" with
"operates", and __dfs_mode is a template parameter, not a variable.
+ // It applys a Dept
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Should we move this comment too before the 'case', and aligned with it?
Actually this comment is for the if statement below, not the whole
case branch. I've made this clearer by moving "Every change..." part
to the switch statement, where it
Hi,
On 10/27/2013 09:12 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
@@ -190,9 +224,9 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
}
break;
case _S_opcode_subexpr_begin:
- // Here's the critical part: if there's nothing changed since last
- // visit, do NOT continue. This prevents th
