On Sat, Jun 28, 2025, at 10:00 PM, Wiley Young wrote:
> I don't see any other written instances of omitting a ':' amongst the
> examples in these x4 descriptions.
>
> Whether the existing omission was intentional or no, I think it would be
> helpful for the reader to point up how that one line of c
On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 14:00:11 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Both of those are valid syntax, and they have *slightly* different
meanings.
True, both forms are syntactically valid.
It could be, at some earlier draft, that the variation in syntax was placed
there as an exercise for the reader, given h
