Fixed a typo level problem with an Index and a spurious comment.

Change-Id: Ie48f7ee835fbff29e00b57424816f193141d37fd
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/c/82641
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
This commit is contained in:
Erik Ernst
2018-11-02 16:30:43 +00:00
parent da93e27833
commit 09a44b8da2
+9 -3
View File
@@ -10848,8 +10848,11 @@ See the discussion in section \ref{imports} for the reasoning behind this rule.
}
\LMHash{}%
We say that $L$ \Index{re-exports library } $B$, and also that $L$ {\em re-exports namespace } $NS_n$.
When no confusion can arise, we may simply state that $L$ \NoIndex{re-exports }$B$, or that $L$ {\em re-exports }$NS_n$.
We say that $L$ \Index{re-exports library} $B$, and also
that $L$ \Index{re-exports namespace} $NS_n$.
When no confusion can arise, we may simply state
that $L$ \NoIndex{re-exports} $B$, or
that $L$ \NoIndex{re-exports} $NS_n$.
\LMHash{}%
It is a compile-time error if a name $N$ is re-exported by a library $L$ and $N$ is introduced into the export namespace of $L$ by more than one export, unless all exports refer to same declaration for the name $N$.
@@ -10985,7 +10988,10 @@ It is a compile-time error if the string literal $x$ that describes a URI contai
\LMHash{}%
It is a compile-time error if the string literal $x$ that is used in a \synt{uriTest} is not a constant expression, or if $x$ involves string interpolation.
\LMHash{}% A {\em configurable URI} $c$ of the form \code{\metavar{uri} $\metavar{configurationUri}_1$ \ldots $\metavar{configurationUri}_n$} {\em specifies a URI} as follows:
\LMHash{}%
A \Index{configurable URI} $c$ of the form
\code{\metavar{uri} $\metavar{configurationUri}_1$ \ldots $\metavar{configurationUri}_n$}
\IndexCustom{specifies a URI}{specify a URI} as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{} Let $u$ be \metavar{uri}.
\item{} For each of the following configuration URIs of the form \code{\IF{} ($\metavar{test}_i$) $\metavar{uri}_i$}, in source order, do the following.