[Ur] Too restrictive syntax sugar for monads (bug #127).

[Alexei Golovko]

18.02.2012, 17:21, "Adam Chlipala" <adamc at impredicative.com>:
>
> Here's a simple example that motivates the design choice:
>
> ...

Thank you, this sounds reasonable now, though I whatever prefer non-restrictive alternative. Maybe, just have both? I think, reversed semicolon ("⁏", U+204F) is good notation for my case ;-)

And yet one typo: in subsubsection 9.1.2, missed binary operator '=' (line 2173).