Add the Formattable section to the spec #198
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I think we are talking about this in #190 ? |
4694396 to
5170416
Compare
|
Closing as out of date after #307. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As the proposal's text describes, a
Formattableis a wrapper around values and their formatting options. It may be thought of as an abstraction that allows us to define the rest of the specification in a manner that's independent of the actual type of any runtime value.The text briefly refers to MessageFormatParts. The section defining them has not yet been submitted for review, but some relevant discussion may be found in issue #41. Similarly, while PatternElements are also referred to in the preceding PR #195, they are not yet in the spec. Relevant discussion may be found in #190, which also includes some consideration of Formattables.
In the
thirdproposal by @stasm, a corresponding abstraction uses the nameRuntimeValue.