From e47611204f506bac2a53a81dd9a0e6e85600575e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jim Pryor <profjim@jimpryor.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:11:53 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] week1: fix markup processing?

Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor <profjim@jimpryor.net>
---
 week1.mdwn | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/week1.mdwn b/week1.mdwn
index 36ebdfcc..6773a771 100644
--- a/week1.mdwn
+++ b/week1.mdwn
@@ -603,6 +603,7 @@ Here's how it looks to say the same thing in various of these languages.
 
 	It's easy to be lulled into thinking this is a kind of imperative construction. *But it's not!* It's really just a shorthand for the compound "let"-expressions we've already been looking at, taking the maximum syntactically permissible scope. (Compare the "dot" convention in the lambda calculus, discussed above.)
 
+<!-- 
 
 9.	Some shorthand
 
@@ -680,6 +681,7 @@ Here's how it looks to say the same thing in various of these languages.
 
 	When a previously-bound variable is rebound in the way we see here, that's called **shadowing**: the outer binding is shadowed during the scope of the inner binding.
 
+-->
 
 Some more comparisons between Scheme and OCaml
 ----------------------------------------------
-- 
2.11.0