On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 12:06:58AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> In "nq" builds, section-opening QQzs can result in headings which
> look like "widow" ones accompanied by small boxes of "QQ x.x".
>
> When you start a section by a QQz, it is likely an essential one
> and would better be presented even in "nq" builds.
>
> Promote such two QQzs to "essential" ones.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx>
Good points! I queued and pushed the series, thank you!
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> intro/intro.tex | 6 +++---
> together/applyrcu.tex | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/intro/intro.tex b/intro/intro.tex
> index 635173e1..e39ea652 100644
> --- a/intro/intro.tex
> +++ b/intro/intro.tex
> @@ -416,12 +416,12 @@ sequential case when analyzing the performance of parallel algorithms.
> \subsection{Productivity}
> \label{sec:intro:Productivity}
>
> -\QuickQuiz{
> +\EQuickQuiz{
> Why all this prattling on about non-technical issues???
> And not just \emph{any} non-technical issue, but \emph{productivity}
> of all things?
> Who cares?
> -}\QuickQuizAnswer{
> +}\EQuickQuizAnswer{
> If you are a pure hobbyist, perhaps you don't need to care.
> But even pure hobbyists will often care about how much they
> can get done, and how quickly.
> @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ sequential case when analyzing the performance of parallel algorithms.
>
> Besides, if you \emph{really} didn't care about productivity,
> you would be doing it by hand rather than using a computer!
> -}\QuickQuizEnd
> +}\EQuickQuizEnd
>
> \IX{Productivity} has been becoming increasingly important in recent decades.
> To see this, consider that the price of early computers was tens
> diff --git a/together/applyrcu.tex b/together/applyrcu.tex
> index e3a0d2fe..9aef3879 100644
> --- a/together/applyrcu.tex
> +++ b/together/applyrcu.tex
> @@ -196,13 +196,13 @@ references.
>
> \subsubsection{Discussion}
>
> -\QuickQuiz{
> +\EQuickQuiz{
> Wow!
> \Cref{lst:together:RCU and Per-Thread Statistical Counters}
> contains 70 lines of code, compared to only 42 in
> \cref{lst:count:Per-Thread Statistical Counters}.
> Is this extra complexity really worth it?
> -}\QuickQuizAnswer{
> +}\EQuickQuizAnswer{
> This of course needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis.
> If you need an implementation of \co{read_count()} that
> scales linearly, then the lock-based implementation shown in
> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ references.
> with all the scalability and performance benefits of the
> implementation shown in
> \cref{lst:together:RCU and Per-Thread Statistical Counters}!
> -}\QuickQuizEnd
> +}\EQuickQuizEnd
>
> Use of RCU enables exiting threads to wait until other threads are
> guaranteed to be done using the exiting threads' \co{__thread} variables.
>
> base-commit: e4815ca92805056635d98935562ced9e41fd0fb4
> --
> 2.17.1
>
