Re: (doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr), (doc 'NIL)

Hi Jon, > I think all you have to do is to close the tags with like this: > Aah, yes! That's obvious! :) Thanks! ♪♫ Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: (doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr), (doc 'NIL)

Hi Alex, I think all you have to do is to close the tags with like this: This seems to validate. /Jon On 7. Oct, 2014, at 12:18, Alexander Burger wrote: > Hi Jon, > > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 07:03:41PM +, Jon Kleiser wrote: >> After a little discussion on IRC, Alex decided to change

Re: (doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr), (doc 'NIL)

Hi Jon, On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 07:03:41PM +, Jon Kleiser wrote: > After a little discussion on IRC, Alex decided to change the > doc/refC.html so that the two lines (43, 44) in doc/rlook.html were no > longer needed. Oh, sorry! I just notice that the current solution (i.e. using multiple ta

Re: (doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr), (doc 'NIL)

Hi, After a little discussion on IRC, Alex decided to change the doc/refC.html so that the two lines (43, 44) in doc/rlook.html were no longer needed. Now (doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr) and friends will also work. (doc 'NIL), however, was considered not interesting enough to bother with. I can agree.

(doc 'caar), (doc 'cadr), (doc 'NIL)

Hi, In August, Christophe pointed at some problems with looking up functions like 'caar' and 'cadr' in the docs. I fixed the problem in doc/rlook.html by adding a couple of lines (43, 44). Now I see there are similar problems w