From: jim <jim@web>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 10:38:40 +0000 (-0400)
Subject: re-conceal OCaml
X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=2e0ea1ad1187d391cf3bb50c08bddf00fbeada7b;ds=sidebyside

re-conceal OCaml

This reverts commit e36eaae1de25d2ba2b42afe2f77f51f6a2470a7b
---

diff --git a/topics/week13_coroutines_exceptions_and_aborts.mdwn b/topics/week13_coroutines_exceptions_and_aborts.mdwn
index f0ddc61d..706050ed 100644
--- a/topics/week13_coroutines_exceptions_and_aborts.mdwn
+++ b/topics/week13_coroutines_exceptions_and_aborts.mdwn
@@ -425,9 +425,7 @@ There are also different kinds of "syntactic sugar" we can use to hide the conti
       (+ (foo 1) 1000))
 
 
-And in OCaml:
-
-<pre>
+<!--
 # #require "delimcc";;
 # open Delimcc;;
 # let reset body = let p = new_prompt () in push_prompt p (body p);;
@@ -456,7 +454,8 @@ And in OCaml:
 - : int = 1020
 # test_shift 2;;
 - : int = 1020
-</pre>
+-->
+
 
 Various of the tools we've been introducing over the past weeks are inter-related. We saw coroutines implemented first with zippers; here we've talked in the abstract about their being implemented with continuations. Oleg says that "Zipper can be viewed as a delimited continuation reified as a data structure." Ken expresses the same idea in terms of a zipper being a "defunctionalized" continuation---that is, take something implemented as a function (a continuation) and implement the same thing as an inert data structure (a zipper).