Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> -1) If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares >> +#. If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares >> that facility. Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones >> that you use. > > Wait. This will render the list starting from: > > 1. If you use ... > > In patch 1/1, you didn't change the ")". > > It was Jani who suggested "#.", but "#)" would work just fine. So I'm a little confused. Is the objection that it renders the number as "1." rather than "1)"? That doesn't seem like the biggest of deals, somehow, but am I missing something? A bigger complaint I might raise is that auto-numbering restarts the enumeration in each subsection, so we have a lot of steps #1, which is a definite change from before. That, of course, can be fixed by giving an explicit starting number in each subsection, partially defeating the point of the change in the first place. I honestly have to wonder: does this document need the enumerated list at all? We don't refer to the numbers anywhere, so I don't think there is much useful information there. How about just using regular bulleted lists instead? That said, I don't have strong feelings one way or the other, and can certainly apply it as-is if that's the consensus on what we should do. Thanks, jon
