--- a/handouts/ho03.tex	Sun Oct 01 15:25:22 2023 +0100
+++ b/handouts/ho03.tex	Mon Oct 02 23:10:56 2023 +0100
@@ -562,11 +562,11 @@
 \end{figure}
 
 \begin{figure}[p]
-\small
+\small 
 \lstinputlisting[numbers=left,firstline=48,firstnumber=48,lastline=85]{../progs/automata/thompson.sc}
 \caption{The second part of the Thompson Construction implementing
   the composition of NFAs according to $\cdot$, $+$ and ${}^*$.
-  The implicit class (Lines 48--54) about rich partial functions
+  The extension (Lines 48--54) about rich partial functions
   implements the infix operation \texttt{+++} which
   combines an $\epsilon$NFA transition with an NFA transition
   (both are given as partial functions---but with different type!).\label{thompson2}}
@@ -912,8 +912,11 @@
 OK\ldots now you know why regular expression matchers in those
 languages are sometimes so slow. A bit surprising, don't you agree?
 Also it is still a mystery why Rust, which because of the reasons
-above avoids NFAs and uses DFAs instead cannot compete in all cases
+above avoids NFAs and uses DFAs instead, cannot compete in all cases
 with our simple derivative-based regular expression matcher in Scala.
+There is an explanation for this as well\ldots{}remember there the
+offending examples are of the form $r^{\{n\}}$. Why could they be
+a problem in Rust?
 
 \subsection*{Subset Construction}
 
@@ -1623,7 +1626,7 @@
 \end{center}
 
 \noindent
-I let you implement this ``automaton''.
+You might want to implement this ``automaton''. What do you get?
 
 While this makes all sense (modulo the flaw with the infinite states),
 does this automaton teach us anything new? The answer is no, because it
@@ -1634,7 +1637,7 @@
 a way to restrict the number of states to something finite.
 Meaning it would give us a real automaton.
 However, this would lead us far, far away from what we want
-discuss here.
+discuss here. The end.