On Sun 07 Aug 2016 13:38, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes: > On Mon 08 Feb 2016 22:04, Matt Wette <matthew.we...@verizon.net> writes: > >> One problem I have with the ref’ manual is the section on (ice-9 >> match). The grammar has terms like “string” where I don’t know if >> this means the literal term “string” or a string literal. It would be >> nicer to have a grammar where the literal term “string” is in >> code-case and a string literal is described by “string” in italics. I >> have worked on rewriting the match match grammar as @example and as >> @table. >> >> Does either of these look better to you? See the PDF attached. I am >> willing to complete the whole mess in another format, but I need to >> know which one is preferred, if any, and someone has to verify that >> the new grammar specification is accurate. > > Would you mind attaching a .texi diff? I am having trouble getting > context here. Thanks :)
Ping :) Cheers, Andy
