I am now trying to teach myself about geodesics, and a passage of my notes reads:
In this chapter geodesics have been introduced as generalizations of straight lines through $$\frac{Du^a}{ds}=0$$ Here two alternative characterizations of geodesics are considered.
$(\mathrm{a})$ Consider a curve $C$ joining two fixed points $x_A$ and $x_B$. This can be defined through $x^a=x^a(\lambda)$, where $\lambda \in [a, b]$ is a parameter. The length of the curve can be expressed as an integral $$L=\int_a^b \sqrt{g_{cd}\frac{dx^c}{\color{red}{d\lambda}}\frac{dx^d}{\color{red}{d\lambda}}}d\lambda\tag{?}$$ Geodesics may be defined as curves that minimise (or maximise) $L$ for fixed end points $x_A$ and $x_B$. The integral is awkward to work with due to the parametrisation ambiguity of the integral.
The second method, $(\mathrm{b})$ is no interest to what I have to ask here. The simple question I have is why are there the red parts in denominators of $(\mathrm{?})$. In other words, I think those denominators should be unity, $d\lambda=1$. I say this because from the equation for the differential line segment (squared): $$ds^2=g_{cd} dx^c dx^d\tag{A}$$
Since the action, $$L=\int_{a}^{b} ds = \int_{a}^{b}\sqrt{g_{cd}dx^cdx^d}d\lambda\tag{B}$$ I think the notes are wrong and $(\mathrm{?})$ should actually be $$\int_{a}^{b}\sqrt{g_{cd}dx^cdx^d}d\lambda$$
I thought the above would be enough to convince others that this is all just another typo and I have the right expression, but sadly, I came across these handwritten notes, which I will embed as an image below:
Seeing this only makes me believe that I am the one making the mistake and that $(\mathrm{?})$ truly is correct.
So, how can $(\mathrm{?})$ possibly be correct when it is simply derived from taking the square root of $(\mathrm{A})$ [as in $(\mathrm{B})$]?
Carrying your reasoning forward, since $ds^2=g_{cd}dx^cdx^d$, we'll get $$ \int_a^b ds=\int_a^b \sqrt{g_{cd}dx^c dx^d} =\int_a^b \sqrt{g_{cd}\frac{dx^c}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^d}{d\lambda}}d\lambda. $$