| 16 Jan 2024 |
 fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
I think I understand sufficiently now: "executing sequential steps" here refers to explicit sequencing of computing operations. There is no explicit sequencing of computing operations. Sequencing of computing operations only happens implicitly through specification of data dependencies. * That’s right, it’s not very precise and, if you think too hard about it, potentially misleading. Of course the evaluator does things in some sequence, you just don’t have much control over it. The “executing sequential steps” is an old fragment I took from something or someone. Feel free to suggest a rewording in a PR | 07:10:20 |
| fricklerhandwerk | Thinking too hard about stuff usually reveals that it’s all a scam… | 07:11:37 |
 @bzzm3r:matrix.org | Sounds good. Currently I'm working on a PR to enable auto-formatting of EBNF in the Nix (reference) manual. (Rather than manually formatting the markdown...) | 07:11:38 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
Sounds good. Currently I'm working on a PR to enable auto-formatting of EBNF in the Nix (reference) manual. (Rather than manually formatting the markdown...) That would be cool. Just writing down the EBNF would be way cooler though because the first is cosmetic while the second is essential. | 07:12:48 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
Sounds good. Currently I'm working on a PR to enable auto-formatting of EBNF in the Nix (reference) manual. (Rather than manually formatting the markdown...) * That would be cool. Just writing down the EBNF in the first place would be way cooler though because the first is cosmetic while the second is essential. | 07:12:58 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | In reply to @fricklerhandwerk:matrix.org
That would be cool. Just writing down the EBNF in the first place would be way cooler though because the first is cosmetic while the second is essential. I can do that first quite happily!
But then it won't live in the docs "properly", as it won't be formatted per the contributing instructions. Perhaps it can just live in a side branch, where it can still receive reviews?
| 07:13:48 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | I was not thrilled when I found out how the EBNF had to be formatted. | 07:14:08 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | So if I can skip that all together for now, I'd be much happier, yes. | 07:14:17 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
I can do that first quite happily!
But then it won't live in the docs "properly", as it won't be formatted per the contributing instructions. Perhaps it can just live in a side branch, where it can still receive reviews?
There are no real conventions for it, it just started adding stuff using some dreamt-up EBNF syntax from my faulty memory and wrapping it in a block quote for highlighting. | 07:15:21 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | (The other thing I was noticing while writing out the EBNF: it would be very, very nice to be able to link between meta-identifiers. So that would be missing in the first pass too, hopefully not to the chagrin of reviewers.) | 07:15:28 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | Yeah, the block quotes are what I am referring to: backticking each piece..., putting > | 07:16:03 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | Well, I'll give it a go, maybe I was being too lazy. | 07:16:11 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
(The other thing I was noticing while writing out the EBNF: it would be very, very nice to be able to link between meta-identifiers. So that would be missing in the first pass too, hopefully not to the chagrin of reviewers.) All of that would be super nice to have, but it doesn’t matter as long as nothing is written down to begin with. Stressing out about those details just postpones the writing. | 07:16:52 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | Alright, will re-prioritize. Expect something even sooner | 07:17:25 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | (Will do it piecemeal too) | 07:17:33 |
| @bzzm3r:matrix.org | * (Will do it piecemeal too, tiny PRs) | 07:17:40 |
| fricklerhandwerk | In reply to @bzzm3r:matrix.org
Yeah, the block quotes are what I am referring to: backticking each piece..., putting > Just give it a go. If I’m at the keyboard I can always fix it up. | 07:17:42 |
