From ffd41752f706eab7076c0d35d89e25611d00ef0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lars Smit Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:50:44 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fixed typos in docs/CallingConvention.rst --- docs/CallingConvention.rst | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/CallingConvention.rst b/docs/CallingConvention.rst index e46e86ffb3155..cadce8c3fcefc 100644 --- a/docs/CallingConvention.rst +++ b/docs/CallingConvention.rst @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ components, each operating on a different abstraction level: * the high-level semantics of the call (pass-by-reference vs. pass-by-value), - + * the ownership and validity conventions about argument and result values ("+0" vs. "+1", etc.), and @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ considering here: for the value, this convention allows the callee to use the value at a later point without taking any extra action to keep it alive. - The flipside is that this convention requires a lot of extra work + The flip side is that this convention requires a lot of extra work when a single value is used multiple times in the caller. For example, a value passed in every iteration of a loop will need to be copied/retained/whatever each time. @@ -1181,7 +1181,7 @@ legal type sequences from the direct results. If this yields an empty sequence, the result type is `void`. If it yields a single legal type, the result type is the corresponding Clang type. No other could actually have come from an imported C declaration, so we don't have -any real compatiblity requirements; for the convenience of +any real compatibility requirements; for the convenience of interoperation, this is handled by constructing a new C struct which contains the corresponding Clang types for the legal type sequence as its fields.