Re: define-markup-function problem

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:42:35AM -0500, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Graham,
>
>> Sure it can!  But unless you help, it won't.  :)   Just suggest
>> the exact text to add or subtract, and it'll be done within days
>> by Jonathan.
>
> To be honest, I don't feel that I understand *why* the change in my  
> Scheme made it work, so I don't feel good suggesting a doc fix. I simply 
> added parentheses, removed them, shuffled things around, and so on until 
> it finally *did* work "as expected", then tried to reverse-engineer 
> *why*. (I'm not sure I'm even right in the reasoning I posted, unless 
> someone like Nicholas confirms it…)
>
> I'm pretty sure that's not a *great* place for a doc-writer to start  
> from…  ;-)

Hey, that's way more than I know about the subject.  Remember my
rule for doc-work: "you don't need to be perfect; you just need to
be better than nothing".

Especially in NR 6.  If you can't think of anything else, just
send "Sometimes you need to delete the word `cons' and add some
parentheses in random places".  At least that'll give some kind of
hint to the next person.  And if GDP 2 ever gets around to NR 6,
we'll clean it up then.

Cheers,
- Graham