From f4de6344eb8d0b237145a773be81ba92f8021a74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Artur Opala <250927+arturopala@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 09:23:44 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Fix an example of covariant type

From the context of the document, it looks like a `type`, not a `def`, should be used here.
---
 docs/docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/docs/docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md b/docs/docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md
index e17662a174a7..6d44e493988e 100644
--- a/docs/docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md
+++ b/docs/docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ is treated as a shorthand for
 ```
 Abstract types and opaque type aliases remember the variances they were created with. So the type
 ```scala
-def F2[-A, +B]
+type F2[-A, +B]
 ```
 is known to be contravariant in `A` and covariant in `B` and can be instantiated only
 with types that satisfy these constraints. Likewise