New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Suggestion: Rename positive digit
in the EBNF ruleset to nonzero digit
#665
Comments
This is pretty easy to fix and mathematically correct. @dtonhofer do you mind putting in a PR? |
Okay, will do it later today (hopefully). |
dtonhofer
added a commit
to dtonhofer/semver
that referenced
this issue
Feb 28, 2021
Note: - I have not upgrade the version at the top of the page, still at 2.0.0. Technically, should become 2.0.1 I suppose. - I have used the name `non-zero digit` rather than `nonzero digit` similar to the existing `non-digit`.It's a matter of taste.
Submitted a pull request. Note the following:
|
Yes, 2.0.1. |
Changed. Seems to have updated the pull request accordingly. |
alexandrtovmach
added
question
Question about SemVer and use cases
update
Update current idea/rule
labels
Jun 14, 2021
|
Good day. What happened to this? It seems to be in limbo. Accept? Reject? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I suggest to rename the
positive digit
in the EBNF ruleset tononzero digit
Because "positive" is not really an adjective applicable to a "digit": it's a digit, not a number.
So we have the digit "zero" expressed by
"0"
and the other digits, thenonzero digit
sThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: