Re: Proposed rewrite of Appendix G

"Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> writes:
> I'm particularly interested on feedback on the form of the exposition:
> rather then do it in pseudo-code as the original has, with lots of
> variables and processes which all take two arguments and return two
> values, I've tried to do it at a more abstract level.

I think it's an improvement. The only thing I noticed was that the
term "bag-merger" is used without any definition. I think the
definition is pretty obvious, but given the formal nature of the text,
it probably deserves a sentence of explanation.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The wonder is, not that the field of
http://nwalsh.com/            | stars is so vast, but that man has
                              | measured it.--Anatole France