Hello, The paper appears interesting, valuable, and for the most part well written. I only had time to look over the first 5 pages this morning, but perhaps some of these notes will be helpful as you polish the paper... If this is useful I can try to look at the rest later.
In the abstract: "Factor's metaprogramming features have allowed it to implement..." The word "it" here is weird, what is "it" referring to? Factor? Did Factor implement anything? Perhaps "us" would be better? Or just rewrite the whole sentence. In the introduction: "It was originally conceived as an experiment to create ... which is ...", mixing 'was' and 'is' like this is bad. Are we in the past or present tense? "One of our goals is to make Factor suitable for development of larger applications, ..." replace with: "The inclusion of a robust module system makes Factor suitable for the development of larger applications" "Factor has extensive support for low-level..." This sentence is a run-on. Split it into at least two separate sentences. Perhaps at "... C and other languages. This allows for ..." "A system for staged metaprogramming, offering flexibility and ease of use" replace with "A flexible and easy to use staged metaprogramming system. Figures 1 and 2 are placed very goofily at the top of page two, uncheck noob in MacTex or pass -no-noob to LaTex. ;) "(cite something about row polymorphism)" <-- Make sure you actually do this. It's unfortunate that figure 6 appears on a different page than the description of what it's doing. In Lexical Variables: "low rate of use" is weird, maybe "infrequent use" would be better? In Object System: "(methods)" replace with "..., called methods, ..." Regards, -Harold ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
