Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 27, 2023. It is now read-only.

PSR for LET, LETTING #21

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: psr-proposal
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

PSR for LET, LETTING #21

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

dlurton
Copy link
Member

@dlurton dlurton commented Oct 2, 2020

Contains a PSR for, LET, and LETTING. I'm leaving most of WITH undefined at this point but I think LET and LETTING are pretty clear.

The built PDF is intended to ultimately contain all of the current PSRs that haven't been adopted into the formal specification yet. At the moment there is only one. Also, this was intended to be easily copy & pasteable into the formal specification without a ton of effort, so it is written in LaTex, uses the same preamble.tex and moves some macros previously defined in spec/main.tex to common/macros.tex.

To build:

cd psr
make

Resulting pdf file resides in spr/main.pdf.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

psr/with-let-letting.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

\subsection*{Lexical Scoping}

Every \gn{var\_decl} included with \gl{WITH}, \gl{LET} or \gl{LETTING} is
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typo: ... LETTING is

psr/with-let-letting.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
psr/with-let-letting.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@therapon therapon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can attach files to GitHub PRs. Can you attach the generated PDF? That would make it easy to review the content. The LaTeX source we can review using this diff.

Comment on lines -129 to -135
%%%%
%% Watermark
%%%%
\usepackage[firstpage]{draftwatermark} % to remove replace `firstpage` with `nostamp`
\SetWatermarkScale{5.0}


Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are we removing this? If you do not want the watermark to show, use the instructions in the comment.

Copy link
Member Author

@dlurton dlurton Oct 5, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's unnecessary because there is already the text --DRAFT-- in the heading of every page. Also, it was too big to fit on the page. You could only see part of R, the full A and part of F, previously. When I shrank it, it just looked bad and distracting (IMHO).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not too attached to this I just found the text easier to read without the watermark. If the DRAFT watermark is convention or something let me know...

@dlurton dlurton changed the title Psr proposal with let PSR for LET, LETTING Oct 5, 2020
@dlurton dlurton requested review from alancai98 and therapon October 5, 2020 20:29
@dlurton
Copy link
Member Author

dlurton commented Oct 5, 2020

Reuploaded: main.pdf

@alancai98
Copy link
Member

Revision LGTM. Think there was one typo not addressed yet.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants