Merge branch 'master' of ssh://server.philosophy.fas.nyu.edu/Users/lambda/lambda

[lambda.git] / damn.mdwn

diff --git a/damn.mdwn b/damn.mdwn
index 6913c28..ad68775 100644 (file)
--- a/damn.mdwn
+++ b/damn.mdwn
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
-1. Sentences have truth conditions.
+1.     Sentences have truth conditions.
 
-2. If "John read the book" is true, then
-   John read something,
-   Someone read the book,
-   John did something to the book, 
-   etc.
+2.     If "John read the book" is true, then it follows that:
+       John read something,  
+       Someone read the book,  
+       John did something to the book,  
+       etc.
 
 3. If "John read the damn book",
    all the same entailments follow.
@@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ The idea here is we capture the continuation that `(damn)` has when it gets eval
 However, this doesn't work. The reason is that an undelimited continuation represents the future of the evaluation of `(damn)` *until the end of the computation*. So when `'id` is supplied to `k`, we go back to building the at-issue tree until we're finished *and that's the end of the computation*. We never get to go back and evaluate the application of `(cons (cons 'side-effect 'bad) <>)` to anything.
 
 
-With undelimited continuations
+With delimited continuations
 ------------------------------
 
 The straightforward way to fix this is to use, not undelimited continuations, but instead a more powerful apparatus called "delimited continuations." These too will be explained in due course, don't expect to understand all this now.