From 1cb6f3c045dd0d410859d78da61e5ecf94d54286 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jack Firth Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 01:01:42 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Docs tweak --- main.scrbl | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/main.scrbl b/main.scrbl index 15c1997..f67c2cb 100644 --- a/main.scrbl +++ b/main.scrbl @@ -460,10 +460,10 @@ mind: @item{Refactoring rules can be shown to many different developers in a wide variety of different contexts. Therefore, it's important that Resyntax's default recommendations have some degree of @emph{consensus} among the Racket community. Highly divisive suggestions that many developers - disagree with are not a good fit for Resyntax. Discussing your rule with the Racket community prior - to developing it is encouraged, especially if it's likely to affect a lot of code. If necessary, - consider narrowing the focus of your rule to just the cases that everybody agrees are clear - improvements.} + disagree with are not a good fit for Resyntax. Technology is social before it is technical: + discussing your rule with the Racket community prior to developing it is encouraged, especially if + it's likely to affect a lot of code. If necessary, consider narrowing the focus of your rule to just + the cases that everybody agrees are clear improvements.} @item{Refactoring rules should @emph{explain themselves}. The description of a refactoring rule (as specified with the @racket[#:description] option) should state why the new code is an improvement