Octave-FAQ clarification

[Alex Zvoleff]

The attached patch clarifies (to me at least) the discussion of Octave 
vs. Matlab's nested function scoping rules in the Octave-FAQ.  Also, it 
adds a mention of the Nabble searchable mailing list archive to the 
documentation section.

Alex Zvoleff

Index: doc/faq/Octave-FAQ.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/octave/doc/faq/Octave-FAQ.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.29
diff -u -r1.29 Octave-FAQ.texi
--- doc/faq/Octave-FAQ.texi     7 Nov 2007 15:49:37 -0000       1.29
+++ doc/faq/Octave-FAQ.texi     15 Nov 2007 15:46:26 -0000
@@ -450,7 +450,8 @@
 mailing list, or other administrative trivia to the list itself.
 
 An archive of old postings to the help-octave mailing list is maintained
-on @url{http://www.octave.org/archive.html}.
+on @url{http://www.octave.org/archive.html}. A unofficial searchable
+archive is available at @url{http://www.nabble.com/Octave-f1895.html}.
 
 You will also find some user advice and code spread over the web.  Good
 starting points are the Octave Wiki @url{http://wiki.octave.org} and
@@ -725,10 +726,10 @@
 are treated as sub-functions with the same scoping rules as
 sub-functions.  
 
-The authors of Octave consider the nested function scoping rules of
-Matlab to be more problems than they are worth as they introduce
-diffiult to find bugs as inadvertantly modifying a variable in a
-nested function that is also used in the parent is particularly easy.
+The authors of Octave find @sc{Matlab's} nested function scoping rules to
+be problematic, as they can introduce difficult to find bugs since it is
+easy (in @sc{Matlab}) to inadvertently modify a variable in a nested
+function that is also used in the parent.
 
 @item Differences in core syntax
 There a few core @sc{Matlab} syntaxes that are not accepted by Octave,