> Actually, there was a short one before, but I've greatly expanded it to this:
That is quite comprehensive, thanks. It might still be hard for newcomers to read because of the forward references. Hmm. One idea might be to move the explanation for (. e) after introducing sweetexprs; that might make the explanation more natural. And also make it easier to provide examples. I love examples :) Also, maybe separate the reasons for the rule from the reasons that the rule is in n-exps :) > I think it's important to at least *mention* them all, and note that they're > more advanced. That way, the talk at least mentions absolutely everything > about the notation. It's a trade-off; I'm trying to stay less than 15 min > total. Yeah, there's a tension here. Maybe the slides can have more details that you merely skim in the video. Just a thought.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
