From 1d2be09182c8cba124ec5887f62bb0e1721e0a09 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 14:14:44 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] typos
---
topics/_week2_lambda_calculus_intro.mdwn | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/topics/_week2_lambda_calculus_intro.mdwn b/topics/_week2_lambda_calculus_intro.mdwn
index abd2b5c1..d393be1d 100644
--- a/topics/_week2_lambda_calculus_intro.mdwn
+++ b/topics/_week2_lambda_calculus_intro.mdwn
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ a unique result.
The essential usefullness of the lambda calculus is that it is
wonderfully suited to representing functions. In fact, the untyped
-lambda calculus is Turing Complete [[!wikipedia Turing Completeness]]:
+lambda calculus is Turing Complete (see [[!wikipedia Turing Completeness]]):
all (recursively computable) functions can be represented by lambda
terms. (As we'll see, much of the fun will be in unpacking the word
"represented".)
@@ -341,10 +341,10 @@ need to do some work to show how to represent some of the functions
we've become acquainted with. We'll start with the `if ... then
... else...` construction.
- if x then y else z
+ if M then N else L
-For a boolean expression `x`, this complex expression evaluates to `y`
-if `x` evaluates to `'true`, and to `z` if `x` evaluations to `'false.
+For a boolean expression `M`, this complex expression evaluates to `N`
+if `M` evaluates to `'true`, and to `L` if `M` evaluations to `'false.
So in order to simulate and `if` clause in the lambda calculus, we
need to settle on a way to represent `'true` and `'false`.
--
2.11.0