This completes the unification that Sandra and me discussed.
Sandra, interestingly we do prefer "bit-field" over "bit field" and
"bitfield", see the entry above.
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/codingconventions.html | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/htdocs/codingconventions.html b/htdocs/codingconventions.html
index 98a7fc50..c2e9e5e2 100644
--- a/htdocs/codingconventions.html
+++ b/htdocs/codingconventions.html
@@ -417,6 +417,11 @@ and code. The following table lists some simple cases:</p>
<td>"bit field" or "bitfield"</td>
<td>Spelling used in C and C++ standards</td>
</tr>
+ <tr>
+ <td>"bitwise"</td>
+ <td>"bit-wise"</td>
+ <td></td>
+ </tr>
<tr>
<td>"built-in" as an adjective ("built-in function") or "built in"</td>
<td>"builtin"</td>
@@ -454,6 +459,11 @@ and code. The following table lists some simple cases:</p>
<td>"dependant", "dependance", "dependancy"</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
+ <tr>
+ <td>"elementwise"</td>
+ <td>"element-wise"</td>
+ <td></td>
+ </tr>
<tr>
<td>"enumerated"</td>
<td>"enumeral"</td>
--
2.51.0
