|
|
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ Performance is critical for many users today. A few reasons are:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carbon code will be able to call C++, and the other way around, without
|
|
|
overhead. You will be able to migrate a single library to Carbon within a C++
|
|
|
-application, or write new Carbon on top of their existing C++ investment.
|
|
|
+application, or write new Carbon on top of your existing C++ investment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
While Carbon's interoperability may not cover every last case, most C++ style
|
|
|
guides (such as the C++ Core Guidelines or Google C++ Style Guide) steer
|
|
|
@@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ languages: Rust, Swift, Go, Kotlin, Java, and so on).
|
|
|
The key difference between the two is that template arguments can only finish
|
|
|
type-checking _during_ instantiation, whereas generics specify an interface with
|
|
|
which arguments can finish type-checking _without_ instantiation. This has a
|
|
|
-couple important benefits:
|
|
|
+couple of important benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Type-checking errors for generics happen earlier, making it easier for the
|
|
|
compiler to produce helpful diagnostics.
|
Arno Gourdol