Skip to content

Conversation

@abrudz
Copy link
Member

@abrudz abrudz commented Nov 26, 2025

No description provided.

@abrudz abrudz requested a review from FionaDyalog November 26, 2025 23:02
@abrudz abrudz linked an issue Nov 26, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
Copy link
Contributor

@FionaDyalog FionaDyalog left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approved subject to implementing feedback

!!! Hint "Hints and Recommendations"
Dyalog can extend any of these facilities by, for example, adding extra elements, rows, or columns to a result, so code should take this possibility into account.

|Name |Description |Syntax|
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not convinced that "Syntax" is the correct label for the third column. I'm failing to come up with a viable alternative at the moment though. Let's discuss...

@FionaDyalog FionaDyalog requested a review from xpqz November 27, 2025 12:33
@xpqz
Copy link
Collaborator

xpqz commented Nov 27, 2025

This looks safe in terms of CHM. For PDF, paged rendering of large tables will almost certainly look really bad. My controversial take is -- do we even need it at all? We already have a nice ToC, now properly and predictably ordered.

@FionaDyalog
Copy link
Contributor

This looks safe in terms of CHM. For PDF, paged rendering of large tables will almost certainly look really bad. My controversial take is -- do we even need it at all? We already have a nice ToC, now properly and predictably ordered.

It maintains consistency between sections (not the primary reason, but good to have) and includes information that is not in the ToC. As it does not mess uyp the CHM I would like it to go haead. However, your comment about the PDF is very valid. We could hold off on this until Dyalog v21.0 when that issue will resovle itself. Leave it with me.

@abrudz – after implementing feedback please do not merge this in but wait until I confirm. Thanks.

Copy link
Collaborator

@xpqz xpqz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1

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.

Rework col-wise/row-wise table display for System Functions

4 participants