Update README in Lesson 1.3

[ibastys]

No description provided.

[ibastys]

Line 188: Why are there so many AST representations?

Lines 188-189: Should we mention kore if we cannot give the reader any reference for it? Maybe another flag value is more relevant?

Lines 209-211: I could not find any other reference to inj attribute in the tutorial. Do you know where this is mentioned?

Lines 213-214: I added this sentence, but i am not 100% certain it is true.

Lines 451-452: Compiling with flag --gen-bison-parser or --gen-glr-bison-parser gives an additional warning. Could you say something about it?

Lines 478-502: I didn't get an error when parsing after compilation with bison flags on. When compiling with flag --gen-glr... i get two ASTs, correct?

[mariaKt]

Line 188: Why are there so many AST representations?

There are representations at different levels, that are suited best for different purposes/optimizations. E.g., type/sort inference is easier at a higher level (closer to the definition's original structure). Matching is easier at a lower level, after name mangling. The outputs shown are merely different ways to print an AST (easier to read, easier to debug, convert to a different format as expected by another tool). I don't think there is a need to add any information about this at the tutorial though.

Lines 188-189: Should we mention kore if we cannot give the reader any reference for it? Maybe another flag value is more relevant?

There is an exercise in this tutorial, asking about the KORE representation as well, so it seems to me that when the tutorial was created they thought that KORE was important enough to add at this time. For that reason, I myself would not make the decision to change this, I would like some more input.

Lines 213-214: I added this sentence, but i am not 100% certain it is true.

That is true.

[mariaKt]

I have suggested some changes in the text, but overall this looks good. Thank you @ibastys .

[mariaKt]

I have added a couple of comments (one was already there, but was probably missed due to the conversation being hidden). They are minor and easy to address, so I will approve this now, and feel free to merge after you do so. If there is anything unclear, please let me know.