Closed calciiium closed 2 years ago
Actually, I think Hashtbl is right. See here: https://ocaml.org/api/Hashtbl.html
Yes I realized this right after creating this issue. Sorry!
Wait... I'm sorry but should it be Hashtbl not Hashtble...?
I created a pull request for this.
In 8.1.6, I found a small typo: "To support clients who want to hash such structures, Hashtble provides another function hash_param which can be configured to examine more nodes." It should be Hashtbl not Hashtble.