remove a probably confusing remark

[web.git] / ralf / _drafts / typeclasses-exponential-blowup.md

diff --git a/ralf/_drafts/typeclasses-exponential-blowup.md b/ralf/_drafts/typeclasses-exponential-blowup.md
index ec6e6dd2b725e4661bf566825fe32d3384e33359..bfff0aefe2c7c926a9880848405947e48b7a9d25 100644 (file)
--- a/ralf/_drafts/typeclasses-exponential-blowup.md
+++ b/ralf/_drafts/typeclasses-exponential-blowup.md
@@ -9,5 +9,5 @@ So the question arises:  What is the best way to actually encode these hierarchi
 Coq offers two mechanism that are suited to solve this task: typeclasses and canonical structures.
 Both can be instrumented in different ways to obtain a (more or less) convenient-to-use algebraic hierarchy.
 A common approach using typeclasses is the ["unbundled" approach by Bas Spitters and Eelis van der Weegen](https://arxiv.org/abs/1102.1323).
-However, as [has been observed before](https://pastel.archives-ouvertes.fr/pastel-00649586), and as learned the hard way in the Coq formalization of the [original Iris paper](http://iris-project.org/pdfs/2015-popl-iris1-final.pdf), this approach quickly leads to terms that seem to be exponential in size.
+However, as [has been observed before](https://pastel.archives-ouvertes.fr/pastel-00649586), and as learned the hard way in the Coq formalization of the [original Iris paper](https://iris-project.org/pdfs/2015-popl-iris1-final.pdf), this approach quickly leads to terms that seem to be exponential in size.