Most of these commits are already merged to master, which are the new ones? Could you rebase your branch?

Could you please rebase, and/or advise on whether this PR is still needed?

@cassioneri: Ping - could you please review your PR?

I've done the rebase and I think only 3130157 is still needed. See the result at jwakely@44b21ac

I haven't checked the generated PDF after that change.

@jwakely: diffpdf, ksnapshot and then copy-paste into GitHub :-)

Most of the changes look good, but do we really want to change:

Exactly max((last - first) - 1, 0) applications

to:

Exactly max(last - first - 1, 0) applications

?

Similarly, 2*min(...) might be clearer than 2min(...)

@jwakely: The last one should be set as maths, $2 \min( ... )$. Then it looks good I think. If you have it all as code, then keep the operator: \tcode{2 * min(last - first, 0). But I think that's inferior, because it needlessly refers to a function min now rather than to the mathematical concept.

Yes maybe we just need a space between the "2" and "min"

The math mode spacing should be appropriate out of the box. Math mode is whitespace insensitive by the way, so $2\min$ and $2 \min$ render the same.

@cassioneri: Hi - are you still working on this? It looks like a worthwhile cleanup!

Hi Thomas

Unfortunately, I'm not. Since I got a new job I went away from the C++
party. I miss that very much.

I'm sorry I can't help now but I hope to come back one day.

Best regards,
Cassio.
On 8 Mar 2016 9:59 pm, "Thomas Köppe" notifications@github.com wrote:

@cassioneri https://github.com/cassioneri: Hi - are you still working
on this? It looks like a worthwhile cleanup!

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#305 (comment).

OK, thanks. That's a shame!

@zygoloid: Close this PR? Let me know if you were particularly keen on some of the changes and I can try and pull them out and republish them.

@zygoloid: I've downloaded the changes in this PR, please feel free to close it.

Closing, the remaining pieces will be dealt with separately.