Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-31 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi Theo, Theo Buehler wrote on Mon, May 30, 2016 at 07:33:04PM +0200: > Fine. Here's the diff only doing the markup stuff. No objection here if you think it reads better. The spacing is a matter of personal taste. I'm not aware of any recommendation whether to insert spacing into in-line

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 19:33:04 +0200 > From: Theo Buehler > > > Sorry. No. The use of originally still implies that these functions > > are no longer relevant for the purpose mentioned in the sentence. It > > doesn't make sense without the historic context. I'd simply

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 18:55:42 +0200 > From: Theo Buehler > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 06:24:55PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:34:04 +0200 > > > From: Joerg Sonnenberger > > > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Theo Buehler
> Sorry. No. The use of originally still implies that these functions > are no longer relevant for the purpose mentioned in the sentence. It > doesn't make sense without the historic context. I'd simply leave the > NOTES section as-is. Fine. Here's the diff only doing the markup stuff.

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Theo Buehler
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 06:24:55PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:34:04 +0200 > > From: Joerg Sonnenberger > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > > It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:34:04 +0200 > From: Joerg Sonnenberger > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and > > log1p(x) = log(1 + x) are provided and what their historical purpose

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 04:30:10PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 03:34:04PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > > It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and > > > log1p(x) = log(1 +

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Marc Espie
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 03:34:04PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and > > log1p(x) = log(1 + x) are provided and what their historical purpose is. > > However,

Re: exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 02:16:20PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and > log1p(x) = log(1 + x) are provided and what their historical purpose is. > However, as mlarkin@ put it: are any of our users of exp(3) going to > seriously be

exp.3: remove ancient history and some markup tweaks

2016-05-30 Thread Theo Buehler
It may be somewhat interesting to mention why expm1(x) = exp(x) - 1 and log1p(x) = log(1 + x) are provided and what their historical purpose is. However, as mlarkin@ put it: are any of our users of exp(3) going to seriously be asking themselves "hmm, is OpenBSD's exp compatible with BASIC on the