[commit: ghc] master: Comments only (3b4833a)

[git at git.haskell.org]

Repository : ssh://git@git.haskell.org/ghc

On branch  : master
Link       : http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/changeset/3b4833a22596922d5e7a3f0037c960a5e230fb31/ghc

>---------------------------------------------------------------

commit 3b4833a22596922d5e7a3f0037c960a5e230fb31
Author: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
Date:   Thu Sep 21 17:38:54 2017 +0100

    Comments only


>---------------------------------------------------------------

3b4833a22596922d5e7a3f0037c960a5e230fb31
 compiler/types/TyCoRep.hs | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/compiler/types/TyCoRep.hs b/compiler/types/TyCoRep.hs
index a644298..1174b20 100644
--- a/compiler/types/TyCoRep.hs
+++ b/compiler/types/TyCoRep.hs
@@ -1270,7 +1270,7 @@ the evidence for unboxed equalities:
     they might appear in a top-level type, there is no place to bind these
    (unlifted) coercions in the usual way.
 
-  - A coercion for (forall a. t1) ~ forall a. t2) will look like
+  - A coercion for (forall a. t1) ~ (forall a. t2) will look like
        forall a. (coercion for t1~t2)
     But the coercion for (t1~t2) may mention 'a', and we don't have let-bindings
     within coercions.  We could add them, but coercion holes are easier.