Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Have a read. Point. Laugh. And then let me go and I'll crawl back 
>> under my rock again and be quiet. :-/
> 
> Why would we point and laugh? It's very clear and well presented.

Really?

Well... that's nice.

> Nits:

Oh goodie.

> Your abstract has an "an" where you meant "a".

Yeah. I inserted "rare" before "obscure". Evidently I forgot to change that.

> Page 4 is missing a 
> closing paren (and a space after "function").

The former is probably lack of brainpower; the latter is probably lack 
of musclepower. ;-)

> The number of italics near 
> the beginning for emphasis is a bit distracting, sounding more like 
> you're enthused than scholarly. Exclamation marks similarly.

Agreed. I should stop using Haskell so much. (FWIW, just before posting 
I took a bunch of exclamations out of the notes section at the end 
because it sounded too hyperactive. Like, "mahaha! I tricked you all 
into learning monads!") I do tend to overuse emphasis in general.

> On page 6, rather than "To see how we can 
> achieve our stated goal", restate the goal: "To see how we can get both 
> results returned..."

Agreed.

> "Suguar" is misspelled, as is "auxhilery", as is 
> "grammer".  You mistyped "P_SueprChain()".

Yay! I suck. :-}

> Add a concluding section, and explain in the abstract why someone might 
> want to read the paper. These are two parts of any paper that are 
> difficult to get right.

You're telling me...!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message