Add reference.
[matthijs/master-project/report.git] / Chapters / Prototype.tex
index 720053c4f83a6b818fc3416d464696d0d81f8d1c..870b7ccc0266e75930a09947b1c103cc9c5ddec2 100644 (file)
       We cannot leave all these \hs{State} type constructors out, since that
       would change the type (unlike when using type synonyms). However, when
       using type synonyms to hide away sub-states (see
       We cannot leave all these \hs{State} type constructors out, since that
       would change the type (unlike when using type synonyms). However, when
       using type synonyms to hide away sub-states (see
-      \in{section}[sec:prototype:sub-statesynonyms] below), this
+      \in{section}[sec:prototype:substatesynonyms] below), this
       disadvantage should be limited.
 
       \subsubsection{Different input and output types}
       disadvantage should be limited.
 
       \subsubsection{Different input and output types}
         and output state types, possible reducing the type-safety of the
         descriptions.
 
         and output state types, possible reducing the type-safety of the
         descriptions.
 
-    \subsection[sec:prototype:sub-statesynonyms]{Type synonyms for sub-states}
+    \subsection[sec:prototype:substatesynonyms]{Type synonyms for sub-states}
       As noted above, when using nested (hierarchical) states, the state types
       of the \quote{upper} functions (those that call other functions, which
       call other functions, etc.) quickly become complicated. Also, when the
       As noted above, when using nested (hierarchical) states, the state types
       of the \quote{upper} functions (those that call other functions, which
       call other functions, etc.) quickly become complicated. Also, when the