vc 74 (11) [Avatar] Offline
(based on the MEAP v05)

Page 101:
of coruse
instead of
of course

Page 109:
… could be treated as a C#-syntax type (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I) with arity 9, or a
type (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, (H, I)) with arity 8 and the final element being a tuple
the code / non code blocks formatting looks weird

Chapter 9: It's a tiny thing but
is sometimes formatted
arity x

jon.skeet (465) [Avatar] Offline
Thanks for reporting these.

I can't find the "coruse" typo, so maybe I've fixed it already. I'm sure it'll be caught in copy-editing later.

Looking at my original Word document around the long tuple types, it looks like all the parts that should be in code *are* in code, and vice versa. Can you be clearer about the way in which it's odd, or would you just want it not to be in code font at all?

Finally, the "arity-8" vs "arity 8" issue is consistent, but it varies in terms of whether I'm using a specific arity as an adjective. For example: "A tuple with arity 8 is an arity-8 tuple." Again, this might be changed in copy-edit, but it's deliberate at the moment.
vc 74 (11) [Avatar] Offline
, I can still see it on the current MEAP pdf:

(each of which would be in a separate implementation class, of coruse

but as you said it will probably be fixed later

Concerning the paragraph formatting, I'm not sure if you intended to show 'arities' as code. In
with arity 9
for instance,
with arity
is formatted as text and 9 as code.
or a
is also formatted as code but maybe it's just me being in [superpicky][/superpicky] mode

(I can send you a screen capture if needed)
jon.skeet (465) [Avatar] Offline
Right, the first typo is definitely okay in my master document.

Likewise, all of "with arity 9" is in a normal font in the master document. It may be a quirk of the MEAP process, which isn't the same as the final production process - don't worry, it'll definitely be sorted.
vc 74 (11) [Avatar] Offline
OK thanks