<div dir="ltr">I just went and read natural-number/c and it is for an exact non-negative integer.  Is there any appreciable difference between using exact-nonnegative-integer? and natural/number/c.  [If so, I think we should have a positive-number/c to match exact-positive-integer?]  Or, should I move to the exact integer booleans in contracts now?<br> <br>That may be a Robby question instead of a Matthew one.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Doug Williams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:m.douglas.williams@gmail.com">m.douglas.williams@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="ltr">Thanks, Matthew.  It's in good enough shape now to release - which I have.  I'll move on to the simulation and inference collection documentation now.  I don't think they'll be as hard as the science collection was.<br> <br>At some point in time - hopefully within a month or so - I'll revisit the science collection documentation and code.  One thing I have noticed from reading the PLT Scheme Reference Manual is the inclusion of exact integer booleans- things like exact-non-negative integer?.  I assume these are the right things to use in the contracts for any arguments that eventually are used as vector indices, etc.  I also assume that contract error messages for exact-nonnegative-integer? would give a more informative message than for (and/c exact? natural-number/c?), etc.<br> <br>It also seems that there is now a mismatch between how we specify arguments and contracts in Scribble, which is very nice, and in the contracts in the code.  The defproc format seems to be more intuitive.  I haven't revisited the contracts section of the documentations yet - and probably should.<br> <br>Anyway, thanks for answering all the questions I've had.<br><font color="#888888"><br>Doug</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Matthew Flatt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mflatt@cs.utah.edu" target="_blank">mflatt@cs.utah.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div>At Sun, 21 Sep 2008 11:58:25 -0600, "Doug Williams" wrote:<br> > I get a warning the it collected information multiple times on (mod-path<br> > "(planet williams/main/section/shared)") and (index-entry (mod-path "(planet<br> > williams/main/section/shared)")).  Is there an alternative to the second<br> > defmodule that won't give the warning?<br> <br> </div>`defmodule*/no-declare'.<br> <div><br> > I also get a warning that it collected information multiple times on<br> > "(exporting-libraries #f)".  Is that likely from the same problem or a<br> > different one (like a different defmodule problem elsewhere)?<br> <br> </div>That's likely a `defproc' (or `defthing', etc.) inside a section that<br> doesn't have a `defmodule' (either in the immediate section or an<br> enclosing section).<br> <div><br> > Second question: I am including (require (for-label (planet<br> > ../science-with-graphics.ss")) in each of the scribble files, but I'm not<br> > sure it it's necessary if I have the defmodules.  I assume it is used to<br> > resolve references for hyperlinking, but do the defprocs, etc provide the<br> > same information?<br> <br> </div>You need both, currently. The `defmodule's determine the hyperlink<br> bindings created the `defproc's, etc. The `require .... for-label's<br> determine uses of identifiers to be hyperlinked. The same bit of text<br> naming a function in a `defproc' both serves as a hyperlink target and<br> is hyperlinked to itself. (Of course, hyperlinking to itself isn't<br> really useful, but by "hyperlink" in this case I also mean getting the<br> right text style, such as blue versus bold black.)<br> <div><br> > And, I guess a related question:  in my defmodules I am using the planet<br> > reference, but I used the relative reference in the for-label.  It seems<br> > logical to me to do that since the defmodule renders into something the user<br> > sees - and they know about the planet collection, while the for-label is<br> > internal to the scribble files and not visible to the user.<br> <br> </div>Right.<br> <div><br> > Does the planet<br> > deference in defmodule refer to the copy in the planet repository (on my<br> > machine) or to the source code being used to build it?  That is, do I have<br> > to have already built a .plt and fileinjected it for the defmodule to work?<br> <br> </div>Yes, or you need to have a development link. This is definitely a place<br> to improve in the future.<br> <div><br> > One last question:  How can I include an appendix (or at least an unnumbered<br> > section-include?  I have the GNU Free Documentation License I need to<br> > include with the documentation, but would rather it wasn't a numbered<br> > section.<br> <br> </div>You can use `make-unnumbered-part'. There doesn't seem to be a style on<br> `section' (or anything like that) to write the start of an unnumbered<br> section more directly. We should add something, or maybe unnumberedness<br> should have been a style instead of a different structure type.<br> <font color="#888888"><br> <br> Matthew<br> <br> </font></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div> </blockquote></div><br></div>