tuned;
authorwenzelm
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:57:16 +0200
changeset 40153 b6fe3b189725
parent 40152 51e026049e4d
child 40154 e11da4ec9d74
tuned;
doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/ML.thy
doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Prelim.thy
doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Proof.thy
doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/ML.tex
doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/Proof.tex
--- a/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/ML.thy	Tue Oct 26 11:31:22 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/ML.thy	Tue Oct 26 15:57:16 2010 +0200
@@ -463,7 +463,7 @@
   \end{enumerate}
 
   Such weakly structured layout should be use with great care.  Here
-  is a counter-example involving @{ML_text let} expressions:
+  are some counter-examples involving @{ML_text let} expressions:
 
   \begin{verbatim}
   (* WRONG *)
@@ -472,6 +472,10 @@
       val y = ...
     in ... end
 
+  fun foo x = let
+    val y = ...
+  in ... end
+
   fun foo x =
   let
     val y = ...
--- a/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Prelim.thy	Tue Oct 26 11:31:22 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Prelim.thy	Tue Oct 26 15:57:16 2010 +0200
@@ -519,7 +519,7 @@
   of this module do not care about the declaration order, since that
   data structure forces its own arrangement of elements.
 
-  Observe how the @{verbatim merge} operation joins the data slots of
+  Observe how the @{ML_text merge} operation joins the data slots of
   the two constituents: @{ML Ord_List.union} prevents duplication of
   common data from different branches, thus avoiding the danger of
   exponential blowup.  Plain list append etc.\ must never be used for
--- a/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Proof.thy	Tue Oct 26 11:31:22 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/Proof.thy	Tue Oct 26 15:57:16 2010 +0200
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@
 
 text {* In the above example, the starting context is derived from the
   toplevel theory, which means that fixed variables are internalized
-  literally: @{verbatim "x"} is mapped again to @{verbatim "x"}, and
+  literally: @{text "x"} is mapped again to @{text "x"}, and
   attempting to fix it again in the subsequent context is an error.
   Alternatively, fixed parameters can be renamed explicitly as
   follows: *}
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@
 *}
 
 text {* The following ML code can now work with the invented names of
-  @{verbatim x1}, @{verbatim x2}, @{verbatim x3}, without depending on
+  @{text x1}, @{text x2}, @{text x3}, without depending on
   the details on the system policy for introducing these variants.
   Recall that within a proof body the system always invents fresh
   ``skolem constants'', e.g.\ as follows: *}
--- a/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/ML.tex	Tue Oct 26 11:31:22 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/ML.tex	Tue Oct 26 15:57:16 2010 +0200
@@ -484,7 +484,7 @@
   \end{enumerate}
 
   Such weakly structured layout should be use with great care.  Here
-  is a counter-example involving \verb|let| expressions:
+  are some counter-examples involving \verb|let| expressions:
 
   \begin{verbatim}
   (* WRONG *)
@@ -493,6 +493,10 @@
       val y = ...
     in ... end
 
+  fun foo x = let
+    val y = ...
+  in ... end
+
   fun foo x =
   let
     val y = ...
--- a/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/Proof.tex	Tue Oct 26 11:31:22 2010 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/IsarImplementation/Thy/document/Proof.tex	Tue Oct 26 15:57:16 2010 +0200
@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@
 \begin{isamarkuptext}%
 In the above example, the starting context is derived from the
   toplevel theory, which means that fixed variables are internalized
-  literally: \verb|x| is mapped again to \verb|x|, and
+  literally: \isa{x} is mapped again to \isa{x}, and
   attempting to fix it again in the subsequent context is an error.
   Alternatively, fixed parameters can be renamed explicitly as
   follows:%
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@
 %
 \begin{isamarkuptext}%
 The following ML code can now work with the invented names of
-  \verb|x1|, \verb|x2|, \verb|x3|, without depending on
+  \isa{x{\isadigit{1}}}, \isa{x{\isadigit{2}}}, \isa{x{\isadigit{3}}}, without depending on
   the details on the system policy for introducing these variants.
   Recall that within a proof body the system always invents fresh
   ``skolem constants'', e.g.\ as follows:%