Keep it on separate lines, I don't know how that formatting got lost (it's showing up as separate lines in my history).
As for the rest of it, curious as to consensus. -y On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 4:06 PM, David H. Adler <d...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:13:21PM -0400, yary wrote: > > Using different numbers for the examples helps visualize what's > > initialized vs added later: > ... > > *[1 2 3]next[1 2 3 3]next[1 2 3 3 3]* > > I don't know. I think, by having it on separate lines, and watching the > row of '1's extend, is less visually complicated and gets the point > across more directly. > > [1 1 1 1] > next > [1 1 1 1 1 1] > next > [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1] > > How strongly do people feel about this? > > dha > > -- > David H. Adler - <d...@pobox.com> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ > Damn, if this doesn't win me "Pedant of the Year", I don't know what > will. - Mark Rogaski >
