> > > > 3. > > It would be better if the the rows of "Table 9.96" were in alphabetical order. > > I think that this should be done in a different patch when all or a big > part of the functions are merged. >
FYI, I've created another thread [1] to address those things above,
It's a good idea, but the author of this patch should either fix it or you should propose your patch after this one is committed. Otherwise, you're going to make the author create another version based on a fix you already suggested for the current patch.
