On 2017-10-31 05:28 AM, Nicolas Wu wrote:
It’s a yes from me for us to be using LaTeX, but I think it might be useful to
use lhs2TeX to generate the LaTeX.
lhs2TeX makes it possible for us to write literate Haskell files as the source
to the Report, which in turn allows us to type-check much of the code we write,
which is nice.
If we agree to use lhs2TeX, we can migrate the Haskell code fragments
incrementally, after we check in the existing report. I suppose that
would be just another RFC pull request, so feel free to submit it.
Best wishes,
Nick
On 30 Oct 2017, at 15:39, Mario Blažević <blama...@ciktel.net> wrote:
On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
documentation system?
Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume yes. Can
we proceed with this now?
Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will become the
proper home that pull requests https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3
(if also accompanied by an RFC).
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
