I wonder if WL should even haveFor. I see many questions where users are obviously coming from a different language and are confused that For isn't the standard looping construct
(And I feel like there are many questions that are like "Do some specific thing within a For loop")
@ΑλέξανδροςΖεγγ has edited the word Mathematica in many question titles to $\textit{Mathematica}$. Recent example. This is clearly done for cosmetic reasons. Unfortunately, it hinders searching. Example search that no longer gives the most relevant result. I think we should not do cosmetic edits if they cause trouble elsewhere (searching).
I cannot ping him in chat to bring this up though. Can @halirutan or another moderator help me and ping him here so we can discuss the issue?
If anyone else has any input on the topic, please comment. Maybe people don't agree with me on this.
@ΑλέξανδροςΖεγγ Thanks so much for all the work you put into editing! :-) This is just a special situation where it seems to me that avoiding a specific type of edit is better.
Woah that’s awesome @MichaelE2!!! Hey general Q, does anyone know or can provide reference, what is better for assumptions? _Integer Or _?IntegerQ ? Is it system dependent? Or is one definitively better than the others? Integer can be any assumption type.
@Szabolcs Re: our discussion yesterday - there's a footer that shows up when you hover over the column headers in a dataset that explains the level that it's at.
I guess it could be clearer since I use dataset all the time and never noticed it, but there is something that exists.
