Re: Describing Scheme libraries (and thus SRFI's and R7RS) in a "machine readable" format (and rendering in various formats) Ciprian Dorin Craciun 10 Jul 2018 18:40 UTC
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:20 PM Arthur A. Gleckler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I'd like to suggest two typographic improvements: > > It would be nice for Scheme code to be formatted in a fixed-width font. This is strange... All "code" items (including inline identifiers and the snippets) are configured to be rendered with mono-space font, namely `Fira Mono`. Could you give me an example where such formatting is not applied? Perhaps your browser doesn't support font loading (or has been disabled). In any case I'll have to change my CSS to include other fonts as fallback. > Even better, it would be great if you could use a formatter that supports Scheme, so that keywords would be in bold face, etc. I guess this is a little bit harder to do, especially since many snippets are not 100% Scheme-compliant. (Or would a simple regular-expression-based find-and-replace suffice?) However this is quite low on my TODO list at the moment (I have to get back at documenting my interpreter's builtin functionality)... > I found a few instances of raw TeX formatting, e.g. "$\Sigma$" appears in the documentation of string-upcase. It would be good to fix those. Yes, I forgot about those... I'll have to think how to best handle these... I think the best would be to use HTML-compliant escape codes; the other alternative would be to use the character's UTF-8 encoding, but this could break some parsers. > I'm looking forward to everything in your TODO list — and, of course, to SRFI support. Unfortunately the SRFI's are again quite low on my TODO, but I'll add them once I implement support for them in my interpreter. Hopefully other people would join the effort. Ciprian.