Merge branch 'master' of http://git.stderr.nl/matthijs/projects/cλash-paper

* 'master' of http://git.stderr.nl/matthijs/projects/cλash-paper:
  Improve the sections on application and choice a bit.
  Fix typo.

Conflicts:
	cλash.tex

diff --cc cλash.tex
index e1a8ba48b98e2f4ee478021402f2088ba6c69d8d,e63ad4729f371f4f2b3b6a8736053bf734e6b17b..9d4fb22e8c05715952ca6d5c04d65761b0e3d194
--- 1/cλash.tex
--- 2/cλash.tex
+++ b/cλash.tex
@@@ -441,21 -441,10 +441,11 @@@ The abstract goes here
  
  
  \section{Introduction}
 -Hardware description languages have allowed the productivity of hardware engineers to keep pace with the development of chip technology. Standard Hardware description languages, like VHDL and Verilog, allowed an engineer to describe circuits using a programming language. These standard languages are very good at describing detailed hardware properties such as timing behavior, but are generally cumbersome in expressing higher-level abstractions. These languages also tend to have a complex syntax and a lack of formal semantics. To overcome these complexities, and raise the abstraction level, a great number of approaches based on functional languages has been proposed \cite{T-Ruby,Hydra,HML2,Hawk1,Lava,ForSyDe1,Wired,reFLect}. The idea of using functional languages started in the early 1980s \cite{Cardelli1981,muFP,DAISY,FHDL}, a time which also saw the birth of the currently popular hardware description languages such as VHDL.
 +Hardware description languages has allowed the productivity of hardware engineers to keep pace with the development of chip technology. Standard Hardware description languages, like \VHDL\ and Verilog, allowed an engineer to describe circuits using a programming language. These standard languages are very good at describing detailed hardware properties such as timing behavior, but are generally cumbersome in expressing higher-level abstractions. These languages also tend to have a complex syntax and a lack of formal semantics. To overcome these complexities, and raise the abstraction level, a great number of approaches based on functional languages has been proposed \cite{T-Ruby,Hydra,HML2,Hawk1,Lava,ForSyDe1,Wired,reFLect}. The idea of using functional languages started in the early 1980s \cite{Cardelli1981,muFP,DAISY,FHDL}, a time which also saw the birth of the currently popular hardware description languages such as \VHDL.
  
- What gives functional languages as hardware description languages their merits is the fact that basic combinatorial circuits are equivalent to mathematical function, and that functional languages lend themselves very well to describe and compose these mathematical functions. 
- 
++What gives functional languages as hardware description languages their merits is the fact that basic combinatorial circuits are equivalent to mathematical function, and that functional languages lend themselves very well to describe and compose these mathematical functions.
  \section{Hardware description in Haskell}
  
-   To translate Haskell to hardware, every Haskell construct needs a
-   translation to \VHDL. There are often multiple valid translations
-   possible. When faced with choices, the most obvious choice has been
-   chosen wherever possible. In a lot of cases, when a programmer looks
-   at a functional hardware description it is completely clear what
-   hardware is described. We want our translator to generate exactly that
-   hardware whenever possible, to make working with \CLaSH\ as intuitive as
-   possible.
- 
    \subsection{Function application}
      The basic syntactic elements of a functional program are functions
      and function application. These have a single obvious \VHDL\