From: Jim Pryor <profjim@jimpryor.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:09:06 +0000 (-0400)
Subject: week1: tweaks
X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=9a4224ba2c49f246262dd164b7a9102c3ad64fd5;hp=1ce429f4137a261e6a93d6d7e63787697c66e0a9

week1: tweaks

Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor <profjim@jimpryor.net>
---

diff --git a/week1.mdwn b/week1.mdwn
index fa1abce4..cacb73fc 100644
--- a/week1.mdwn
+++ b/week1.mdwn
@@ -57,20 +57,7 @@ We'll tend to write <code>(&lambda;a M)</code> as just `(\a M)`, so we don't hav
 <strong>Application</strong>: <code>(M N)</code>
 </blockquote>
 
-Some authors reserve the term "term" for just variables and abstracts. We won't *participate* in that convention; we'll probably just say "term" and "expression" indiscriminately for expressions of any of these three forms.
-
-Examples of expressions:
-
-	x
-	(y x)
-	(x x)
-	(\x y)
-	(\x x)
-	(\x (\y x))
-	(x (\x x))
-	((\x (x x)) (\x (x x)))
-
-lthough.
+Some authors reserve the term "term" for just variables and abstracts. We won't participate in that convention; we'll probably just say "term" and "expression" indiscriminately for expressions of any of these three forms.
 
 The *lambda* calculus has an associated proof theory. For now, we can regard the proof theory as having just one rule, called the rule of **beta-reduction** or "beta-contraction". Suppose you have some expression of the form: