Merge pull request #1645 from tp/patch-1

Fix typos in Flow doc
This commit is contained in:
A.J. Beamon 2019-05-30 06:46:01 -07:00 committed by GitHub
commit e1e99ce4df
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Promises and futures can be used within a single process, but their real strengt
wait()
------
At the point when a receiver holding a ``Future<T>`` needs the ``T`` to continue computation, it invokes the ``wait()`` statement with the ``Future<T>`` as its parameter. The ``wait()`` statement allows the calling actor to pause execution until the value of the future is set, returning a value of type ``T`` During the wait, other actors can continue execution, providing asynchronous concurrency within a single process.
At the point when a receiver holding a ``Future<T>`` needs the ``T`` to continue computation, it invokes the ``wait()`` statement with the ``Future<T>`` as its parameter. The ``wait()`` statement allows the calling actor to pause execution until the value of the future is set, returning a value of type ``T``. During the wait, other actors can continue execution, providing asynchronous concurrency within a single process.
ACTOR
-----
@ -154,5 +154,5 @@ Some preprocessor definitions will not fix all issues though. When programming f
foo([x]() { x->bar(); })
}
- state variables in don't follow the normal scoping rules. So in flow a state variable can be defined in a inner scope and later it can be used in the outer scope. In order to not break compilation in IDE-mode, always define state variables in the outermost scope they will be used.
- state variables in flow don't follow the normal scoping rules. So in flow a state variable can be defined in a inner scope and later it can be used in the outer scope. In order to not break compilation in IDE-mode, always define state variables in the outermost scope they will be used.