I may not understand your formatting standard, especially for the Comments section. If so, please forgive me.
• 8.32.4.1 calc_hash
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention, with leading bullet, or maybe that is not necessary?
• 8.32.4.3 type_of
– in procedure definition we have parameter “the_map_p”, but in the parameter definition it is “m”.
• 8.32.4.4 rehash
– in procedure definition we have parameter “the_map_p”, but in the parameter definition it is “m”.
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention.
• 8.32.4.5 new
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention.
• 8.32.4.6 new_extra
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention.
• 8.32.4.10 nested_get
– The word “Parameters:” is missing. Improper formatting of this section, i.e., parameters are not numbered.
• 8.32.4.11 put
– in procedure definition we have parameter “operation_p”, but in the parameter definition it is “operation”.
– also procedure definition “operation_p = map :PUT”, is this correct?
• 8.32.4.12 nested_put
– in procedure definition we have “operation_p = PUT”, which is different from 8.32.4.11
– by the way, what is the purpose of nested_put? I don't really see how it differs from put.
• 8.32.4.13 remove
– in procedure definition we have parameter “the_key_p”, but in the parameter definition it is “key”.
• 8.32.4.15 size
– the parameter definition does not follow the standard format, i.e., no “1.”
• 8.32.4.28 load_map
– in procedure definition we have parameter “input_file_name”, but in the parameter definition it is “file_name_p”.
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention. Also, it refers to writing a file, rather than reading one.
• 8.32.4.31 save_map
– in procedure definition we have parameter “the_map_”, but in the parameter definition it is “m”.
– in procedure definition we have parameter “type_”, but in the parameter definition it is “type”.
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention.
• 8.32.4.34 new_from_string
– The Comments section does not seem to follow the standard formatting convention.