From 6bc67ca45d4311fb724df881aadc348858b880d3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Pryor Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 15:31:57 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] offsite_reading typo Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor --- using_the_programming_languages.mdwn | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/using_the_programming_languages.mdwn b/using_the_programming_languages.mdwn index 461927c2..2097dea2 100644 --- a/using_the_programming_languages.mdwn +++ b/using_the_programming_languages.mdwn @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ know much OCaml yet to use it. Using it looks like this: * `<< fun x y -> something >>` is equivalent to `<< fun x -> fun y -> something >>`, which is parsed as `<< fun x -> (fun y -> (something)) >>` (everything to the right of the arrow as far as possible is considered together). At the moment, this only works for up to five variables, as in `<< fun x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 -> something >>`. - * The `<< >>` and `$`-quotes aren't part of standard OCaml syntax, they're provided by this add-on bundle. For the most part it doesn't matter if other expressions are placed flush beside with the `<<` and `>>`: you can do either `<< fun x -> x >>` or `<x>>`. But the `$`s *must* be separated from the `<<` and `>>` brackets with spaces or `(` `)`s. It's probably easiest to just always surround the `<<` and `>>` with spaces. + * The `<< >>` and `$`-quotes aren't part of standard OCaml syntax, they're provided by this add-on bundle. For the most part it doesn't matter if other expressions are placed flush beside the `<<` and `>>`: you can do either `<< fun x -> x >>` or `<x>>`. But the `$`s *must* be separated from the `<<` and `>>` brackets with spaces or `(` `)`s. It's probably easiest to just always surround the `<<` and `>>` with spaces. -- 2.11.0