Fix bug from small improvements

content/blog/04_compiler_improvements.md

@@ -65,8 +65,8 @@ Finally, just like `ast_case::typecheck` called
 
 We follow the same implementation strategy for patterns,
 but we don't need indentation, or recursion:
-{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 114 116 >}}
-{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 122 127 >}}
+{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 115 117 >}}
+{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 123 128 >}}
 
 In `main`, let's print the bodies of each function we receive from the parser:
 {{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/main.cpp" 47 56 >}}
@@ -160,12 +160,12 @@ we simply pass the type of the expression to be case analyzed into
 the pattern matching method. However, since we don't want
 case analysis on functions, we ensure that the type of the expression
 is `type_base`. If not, we report this:
-{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 100 102 >}}
+{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 107 110 >}}
 
 The next exception is in `pattern_constr::match`. It occurs
 when the pattern has a constructor we don't recognize, and
 that's exactly what we report:
-{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 131 133 >}}
+{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 132 134 >}}
 
 The next exception occurs in a loop, when we bind
 types for each of the constructor pattern's variables.
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ constructor type to a `type_arr`. Conceptually,
 this means that the pattern wants to apply the
 constructor to more parameters than it actually
 takes:
-{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 137 137 >}}
+{{< codelines "C++" "compiler/04/ast.cpp" 138 138 >}}
 
 We remove the last throw at the bottom of `pattern_constr::match`.
 This is because once unification succeeds, we know