Refactor the subsections of §12.8.17, "The new operator"

[RexJaeschke]

[As we discussed, Bill, here are the changes needed.]

Regarding §12.8.17, "The new operator", we currently have the following section organization:

§12.8.17 The new operator

• §12.8.17.1 General
• §12.8.17.2 Object creation expressions
• §12.8.17.3 Object initializers
• §12.8.17.4 Collection initializers
• §12.8.17.5 Array creation expressions
• §12.8.17.6 Delegate creation expressions
• §12.8.17.7 Anonymous object creation expressions

I'm refactoring this, as follows:

§12.8.17 The new operator

• §12.8.17.1 General
• §12.8.17.2 Object creation expressions
  • §12.8.17.2.1 General // new; simply contains the content of current §12.8.17.2 Object creation expressions
  • §12.8.17.2.2 Object initializers // renumbered
  • §12.8.17.2.3 Collection initializers // renumbered
  • §12.8.17.2.4 Anonymous object creation expressions // renumbered and moved from current §12.8.17.7 Anonymous object creation expressions
• §12.8.17.3 Array creation expressions // renumbered
• §12.8.17.4 Delegate creation expressions // renumbered

The rationale for this comes from §12.8.17.1, where we say,

There are three forms of new expressions:

• Object creation expressions [[will strike this: and anonymous object creation expressions]] are used to create new instances of class types and value types.
• Array creation expressions are used to create new instances of array types.
• Delegate creation expressions are used to obtain instances of delegate types.

So, I’ve simply rearranged the existing section list to reflect there are 3 categories instead of the 6 currently implied.

And I adjusted all the links to those sections.

[BillWagner]

This LGTM @RexJaeschke

I'd like to wait to merge until our meeting next week in case others want to weigh in.

[jskeet]

Yup, this makes a lot of sense.

[jskeet]

@dotnet/ecma-tc49-tg2 please review offline.

[RexJaeschke]

@BillWagner This PR is ready to merge once the following is resolved (which I don't know how to do): "Renumber standard TOC / renumber-sections (pull_request) failed"

[BillWagner]

@BillWagner This PR is ready to merge once the following is resolved (which I don't know how to do): "Renumber standard TOC / renumber-sections (pull_request) failed"

I think that once this is merged, running the tool will fix the issue.

It's there because you renumbered all the sections that moved. (The tool tracks that and fixes them for you). But, because you didn't update the sections in the grammar annex (which is rewritten by the tool), those are flagged as a concern.

[RexJaeschke]

@BillWagner As you just explained, I should not have updated manually all the old links. You will force-merge this and we'll see what happens.

[BillWagner]

Agreed in meeting 2025/02/19: Bill will merge tomorrow, and cleanup any fallout for renumbering.