I think we probably shouldn't change the size of the banner here unless we
change it everywhere.
Robby
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Two hours ago, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > Two hours ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > > The content column is wider than in the normal documenta
Two hours ago, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Two hours ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > The content column is wider than in the normal documentation
> > display. That makes line-spanning paragraphs a little less nice
> > to read, and it makes right-margin notes more likely to fall out
> > of the display area
Two hours ago, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:36:54 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> >
> > * The layout should have the main column centered. (I thought that it
> > was fine initially if the left column is part of the contents.)
>
> That column alignment looks good, now. Also, I lik
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:36:54 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > It's now available at newdocs.racket-lang.org.
> >
> > There are two things that need to be addressed:
> >
> > * The layout should have the main column centered. (I thought that it
On 2013-03-01 16:23:26 -0500, as...@racket-lang.org wrote:
> 50cd464 Asumu Takikawa 2013-03-01 16:20
> :
> | Another small contract fix
> :
> M collects/net/dns.rkt | 2 +-
>
> collects/net/dns.rkt
>
> --- OLD/collects/net/dns.rkt
> +++ NEW/collects/net/dns.rkt
> @@ -12,7 +12
>> It's now available at newdocs.racket-lang.org.
>>
>> There are two things that need to be addressed:
>>
>> * The layout should have the main column centered. (I thought that it
>> was fine initially if the left column is part of the contents.)
The docs look good. I'm a little confused at w
At Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:36:54 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> It's now available at newdocs.racket-lang.org.
>
> There are two things that need to be addressed:
>
> * The layout should have the main column centered. (I thought that it
> was fine initially if the left column is part of the contents
Yes, you're right. Sorry for that confusion. I don't have that confusion
with positive? and +0.0, after all!
Robby
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Eric Dobson wrote:
> Why is Nonnegative-Real not suggestive of the right thing? To me that
> means (and/c real? (not/c (lambda (x) (< x 0 which
Why is Nonnegative-Real not suggestive of the right thing? To me that
means (and/c real? (not/c (lambda (x) (< x 0 which is exactly what
it is.
I think the confusing part is that -0.0 has a minus sign in front
which means that you think it is negative, but this isn't true.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013
Is there perhaps a more suggestive name? (Not that I'm coming up with
one...)
Robby
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> At Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:05:21 +0100,
> Marijn wrote:
> > On 27-02-13 21:51, Neil Toronto wrote:
> >
> > > (An example that came up in the implementation
At Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:05:21 +0100,
Marijn wrote:
> On 27-02-13 21:51, Neil Toronto wrote:
>
> > (An example that came up in the implementation of matrix norms: the
> > type of (sqrt (/ 1 x)) isn't Nonnegative-Real if x :
> > Nonnegative-Real, but Complex. Consider x = -0.0. Without TR's
> > compl
11 matches
Mail list logo
