Avoid highlighting J # as comment

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/docs/doc/based.html b/docs/doc/based.html
index e865ad4b..c2959b19 100644
--- a/docs/doc/based.html
+++ b/docs/doc/based.html
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
 </head>
 <div class="nav"><a href="https://github.com/mlochbaum/BQN">BQN</a> / <a href="../index.html">main</a> / <a href="index.html">doc</a></div>
 <h1 id="based-array-theory">Based array theory</h1>
+<style>code span.Comment { color: inherit; }</style>
 <p><em>&quot;Like a normal programming language&quot;</em></p>
 <p>This page explains how BQN's array model (christened &quot;based&quot; <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/586656.586663">in 1981</a>) differs from the models used by existing APL dialects, and why the choice was made to discard APL's &quot;everything is an array&quot; dictum. If you're not wondering what the difference is, and don't think everything should be an array, then you can probably just read about BQN's <a href="types.html">type system</a> instead.</p>
 <p>If you're an array programmer then I have bad news for you. My thesis here is that APL took a wrong turn around 1981 when it extrapolated the excellent, but limited, flat array model of APL\360 to the ill-founded nested array model and the rigorous but clumsy boxed array model. Make that two wrong turns, I guess. Simultaneously. Anyway, if you've been brought up in either of these array models, then the best thing to do when starting BQN is to throw out your existing ideas about array depth and nesting (but don't worry too much: the fundamental concept of an array as a rectangular collection of data still holds!). If you'd like to ponder the relationship of BQN to APL later, that's great, but trying to initially understand BQN in terms of APL or J will just cause confusion.</p>