Skip to content

Commit f99f75b

Browse files
authored
Fix minor typos in 0431-isolated-any-functions.md (#2444)
1 parent cae2377 commit f99f75b

File tree

1 file changed

+4
-4
lines changed

1 file changed

+4
-4
lines changed

proposals/0431-isolated-any-functions.md

Lines changed: 4 additions & 4 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ actor WorldModelObject {
116116
}
117117
```
118118

119-
This inexpressible case also arises with a partial applicaion of an
119+
This inexpressible case also arises with a partial application of an
120120
actor method, such as `myActor.methodName`: the resulting function
121121
value captures `myActor` and is isolated to it. For now, these are
122122
the only two cases of isolated captures. However, the upcoming
@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ value must cross an isolation boundary. And the third is that the
145145
isolation is completely dynamically erased: there is no way for the
146146
recipient of the function value to recover what isolation the function
147147
actually wants, which often puts the recipient in the position of doing
148-
unnecesary work.
148+
unnecessary work.
149149

150150
Here's an example of that last problem. The `Task` initializer receives
151151
an opaque value of type `() async throws -> ()`. Because it cannot
@@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ to the language.
355355
[^6]: Technically, it is possible to achieve this effect in Swift
356356
today in a way that Swift could conceivably look through: the caller
357357
could be a closure with an `isolated` parameter, and that closure
358-
could be called with an expression like `fn.isolation` as the arugment.
358+
could be called with an expression like `fn.isolation` as the argument.
359359
Swift could analyze this to see that the parameter has the value of
360360
`fn.isolation` and then understand the connection between the caller's
361361
isolation and `fn`. This would be very cumbersome, though, and it
@@ -753,7 +753,7 @@ argument flows into the second. This is not something to do lightly,
753753
and we think Swift is relatively unlikely to ever add such a feature
754754
as `@isolated(to:)`.
755755

756-
Fortunately, is is unlikely to be necessary. We believe that
756+
Fortunately, it is unlikely to be necessary. We believe that
757757
`@isolated(any)` function types are superior from a usability perspective
758758
for all the dominant patterns of higher-order APIs. The main thing that
759759
`@isolated(to:)` can express in an API signature that `@isolated(any)`

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)