|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |