1. 36
  1.  

  2. 7

    I’m loving the format of the tutorial / explanation.

    1. 4

      Really? The subject matter should be right up my street but in this format I find it very hard to see what’s going on, what this is supposed to be or do.

      1. 3

        Agreed. The inconsistent columns and constant color changes make following the content really difficult for me. Leaves me wishing for something more straightforward.

        The actual work does seem interesting though! Wish it were better presented.

        1. 3

          There’s a regular paper also, but it’s quite mathematical and dense.

        2. 3

          it’s engaging without providing a background in how to read type judgements. Which is nice, since I’ve forgotten about a quarter of how to read type judgement syntax and wasn’t up to digging through it as I sipped my coffee. :)