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 mathe
> 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 leave the
> > NOTES s
> 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 Buehler wrote:
> > > > It may be
> 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.
Index:
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
> > > log1p(x)
> 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 is.
> > However
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 +
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, a
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 as
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 HP
10 matches
Mail list logo