6502/llvm-6502
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/c64scene-ar/llvm-6502.git synced 2025-02-07 14:33:15 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix some typos.

Browse Source 
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@43709 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This commit is contained in:
Duncan Sands 2007-11-05 16:04:58 +00:00
parent e0a34353ee
commit 72261ff1ee
2 changed files with 9 additions and 9 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
docs/tutorial/LangImpl1.html
View File

@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ fib(40)
</pre> </pre>
</div> </div>
<p>We also allow Kaleidoscope to call into standard library functions (this LLVM <p>We also allow Kaleidoscope to call into standard library functions (the LLVM
JIT makes this completely trivial). This means that you can use the 'extern' JIT makes this completely trivial). This means that you can use the 'extern'
keyword to define a function before you use it (this is also useful for mutually keyword to define a function before you use it (this is also useful for mutually
recursive functions). For example:</p> recursive functions). For example:</p>
@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ eventually add side effects for those who prefer them.</p>
<p>In order to make this tutorial <p>In order to make this tutorial
maximally understandable and hackable, we choose to implement everything in C++ maximally understandable and hackable, we choose to implement everything in C++
instead of using lexer and parser generators. LLVM obviously works just fine instead of using lexer and parser generators. LLVM obviously works just fine
with these tools, and choice of these tools doesn't impact overall design.</p> with such tools, and making use of them doesn't impact the overall design.</p>
<p>A note about this tutorial: we expect you to extend the language and play <p>A note about this tutorial: we expect you to extend the language and play
with it on your own. Take the code and go crazy hacking away at it. It can be with it on your own. Take the code and go crazy hacking away at it. It can be
@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ handle them here inline. Numeric values are similar:</p>
<p>This is all pretty straight-forward code for processing input. When reading <p>This is all pretty straight-forward code for processing input. When reading
a numeric value from input, we use the C <tt>strtod</tt> function to convert it a numeric value from input, we use the C <tt>strtod</tt> function to convert it
to a numeric value that we store in <tt>NumVal</tt>. Note that this isn't doing to a numeric value that we store in <tt>NumVal</tt>. Note that this isn't doing
sufficient error checking: it will incorrect read "1.23.45.67" and handle it as sufficient error checking: it will incorrectly read "1.23.45.67" and handle it as
if you typed in "1.23". Feel free to extend it :). Next we handle comments: if you typed in "1.23". Feel free to extend it :). Next we handle comments:
</p> </p>
@ -220,9 +220,9 @@ if you typed in "1.23". Feel free to extend it :). Next we handle comments:
</pre> </pre>
</div> </div>
<p>We handle comments by skipping to the end of the line and then returnning the <p>We handle comments by skipping to the end of the line and then returning the
next comment. Finally, if the input doesn't match one of the above cases, it is next comment. Finally, if the input doesn't match one of the above cases, it is
either an operator character like '+', the end of file. These are handled with either an operator character like '+' or the end of the file. These are handled with
this code:</p> this code:</p>
<div class="doc_code"> <div class="doc_code">

8
docs/tutorial/LangImpl2.html
View File

@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ FunctionAST *ErrorF(const char *Str) { Error(Str); return 0; }
<p> <p>
The <tt>Error</tt> routines are simple helper routines that our parser will use The <tt>Error</tt> routines are simple helper routines that our parser will use
to handle errors. The error recovery in our parser will not be the best and to handle errors. The error recovery in our parser will not be the best and
are not particular user-friendly, but it will be enough for our tutorial. These is not particular user-friendly, but it will be enough for our tutorial. These
routines make it easier to handle errors in routines that have various return routines make it easier to handle errors in routines that have various return
types: they always return null.</p> types: they always return null.</p>
@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ return null on an error.</p>
calling <tt>ParseExpression</tt> (we will soon see that <tt>ParseExpression</tt> can call calling <tt>ParseExpression</tt> (we will soon see that <tt>ParseExpression</tt> can call
<tt>ParseParenExpr</tt>). This is powerful because it allows us to handle <tt>ParseParenExpr</tt>). This is powerful because it allows us to handle
recursive grammars, and keeps each production very simple. Note that recursive grammars, and keeps each production very simple. Note that
parenthesis do not cause construction of AST nodes themselves. While we could parentheses do not cause construction of AST nodes themselves. While we could
do this, the most important role of parens are to guide the parser and provide do this, the most important role of parens are to guide the parser and provide
grouping. Once the parser constructs the AST, parens are not needed.</p> grouping. Once the parser constructs the AST, parens are not needed.</p>
@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ the expression "a+b+(c+d)*e*f+g". Operator precedence parsing considers this
as a stream of primary expressions separated by binary operators. As such, as a stream of primary expressions separated by binary operators. As such,
it will first parse the leading primary expression "a", then it will see the it will first parse the leading primary expression "a", then it will see the
pairs [+, b] [+, (c+d)] [*, e] [*, f] and [+, g]. Note that because parentheses pairs [+, b] [+, (c+d)] [*, e] [*, f] and [+, g]. Note that because parentheses
are primary expressions that the binary expression parser doesn't need to worry are primary expressions, the binary expression parser doesn't need to worry
about nested subexpressions like (c+d) at all. about nested subexpressions like (c+d) at all.
</p> </p>
@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ static PrototypeAST *ParsePrototype() {
</div> </div>
<p>Given this, a function definition is very simple, just a prototype plus <p>Given this, a function definition is very simple, just a prototype plus
and expression to implement the body:</p> an expression to implement the body:</p>
<div class="doc_code"> <div class="doc_code">
<pre> <pre>