Fix heading levels

Author: Florian3k

docs/_docs/internals/syntax-3.1.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ hexDigit      ::= ‘0’ | … | ‘9’ | ‘A’ | … | ‘F’ | ‘a’ |
 
 Informal descriptions are typeset as `“some comment”`.
 
-### Lexical Syntax
+## Lexical Syntax
 The lexical syntax of Scala is given by the following grammar in EBNF
 form.
 

docs/_docs/internals/syntax.md

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ hexDigit      ::= ‘0’ | … | ‘9’ | ‘A’ | … | ‘F’ | ‘a’ |
 
 Informal descriptions are typeset as `“some comment”`.
 
-### Lexical Syntax
+## Lexical Syntax
 
 The lexical syntax of Scala is given by the following grammar in EBNF
 form.

docs/_docs/reference/changed-features/imports.md

@@ -38,13 +38,13 @@ import scala.annotation as ann
 import java as j
 ```
 
-### Migration
+## Migration
 
 To support cross-building, Scala 3.0 supports the old import syntax with `_` for wildcards and `=>` for renamings in addition to the new one. The old syntax
 will be dropped in a future versions. Automatic rewritings from old to new syntax
 are offered under settings `-source 3.1-migration -rewrite`.
 
-### Syntax
+## Syntax
 
 ```
 Import            ::=  ‘import’ ImportExpr {‘,’ ImportExpr}

docs/_docs/reference/contextual/context-functions-spec.md

@@ -74,6 +74,6 @@ See the section on Expressiveness from [Simplicitly: foundations and
 applications of implicit function
 types](https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3158130).
 
-### Type Checking
+## Type Checking
 
 After desugaring no additional typing rules are required for context function types.

docs/_docs/reference/contextual/derivation.md

@@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ authors would normally implement a `derived` method in this way, however this wa
 authors of the higher level derivation libraries that we expect typical type class authors will use (for a fully
 worked out example of such a library, see [Shapeless 3](https://github.com/milessabin/shapeless/tree/shapeless-3)).
 
-### How to write a type class `derived` method using low level mechanisms
+## How to write a type class `derived` method using low level mechanisms
 
 The low-level method we will use to implement a type class `derived` method in this example exploits three new
 type-level constructs in Scala 3: inline methods, inline matches, and implicit searches via  `summonInline` or `summonFrom`. Given this definition of the

docs/_docs/reference/metaprogramming/inline.md

@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ If a `inline` modifier is given for parameters, corresponding arguments must be
 pure expressions of constant type.
 -->
 
-#### The definition of constant expression
+### The definition of constant expression
 
 Right-hand sides of inline values and of arguments for inline parameters must be
 constant expressions in the sense defined by the [SLS §6.24](https://www.scala-lang.org/files/archive/spec/2.13/06-expressions.html#constant-expressions),

docs/_docs/reference/new-types/dependent-function-types-spec.md

@@ -120,6 +120,6 @@ def composeFn[A, B, C]:
   assert(composeFn(i2s)(s2i)(22) == 2)
 ```
 
-### Type Checking
+## Type Checking
 
 After desugaring no additional typing rules are required for dependent function types.

docs/_docs/reference/new-types/type-lambdas-spec.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ TypeParam       ::=  {Annotation} (id [HkTypeParamClause] | ‘_’) TypeBounds
 TypeBounds      ::=  [‘>:’ Type] [‘<:’ Type]
 ```
 
-### Type Checking
+## Type Checking
 
 A type lambda such as `[X] =>> F[X]` defines a function from types to types. The parameter(s) may carry bounds.
 If a parameter is bounded, as in `[X >: L <: U] =>> F[X]` it is checked that arguments to the parameters conform to the bounds `L` and `U`.

docs/_docs/reference/syntax.md

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ hexDigit      ::= ‘0’ | … | ‘9’ | ‘A’ | … | ‘F’ | ‘a’ |
 
 Informal descriptions are typeset as `“some comment”`.
 
-### Lexical Syntax
+## Lexical Syntax
 
 The lexical syntax of Scala is given by the following grammar in EBNF
 form.