Closed wusatosi closed 1 day ago
Thanks for replying to this PR, noted.
So I assume the all the libraries should still be named as beman_shortname
?
Edit: oh crap I mis-typed, I meant beman.shortname
Thanks for replying to this PR, noted.
So I assume the all the libraries should still be named as
beman_shortname
?
Not sure what you are asking. We should not change anything to Beman Standard because nobody voted / proposed this at the sync.
Beman Standard says:
So beman.optional26
it's everywhere in our org. No update from this PR should be kept. AFAIK.
I will clarify the CE naming in #70 .
Alright, I was reading the meeting note and misunderstood, closing this.
Examples can be found here: https://github.com/compiler-explorer/infra/pull/1453/files
beman_iterator_interface
and beman.iterator_interface
are both used in the compiler explorer config (as key in config and value in config). @wusatosi , does this clarify the issue?
Examples can be found here: https://github.com/compiler-explorer/infra/pull/1453/files
beman_iterator_interface
andbeman.iterator_interface
are both used in the compiler explorer config (as key in config and value in config). @wusatosi , does this clarify the issue?
Alright, yeah I understand now.
According to: https://github.com/bemanproject/inplace_vector/pull/14#discussion_r1843440554
execution26 might be non-comforming.
Thanks for replying to this PR, noted.
So I assume the all the libraries should still be named as
beman_shortname
?Edit: oh crap I mis-typed, I meant
beman.shortname
I miss typed. Should be beman.shortname
In accordance to agreement in weekly sync:
Packed a consistency fix
LIBRARY.NAMES
->LIBRARY.NAME
as it is inconsistent toREPOSITORY.NAME
.