This value may or may not be accurate, but it certainly is
eye-catching. For some things perl5 is faster than perl4, but often
-the reliability and extensability have come at a cost of speed. The
+the reliability and extensibility have come at a cost of speed. The
benchmark suite that Gisle released earlier has been hailed as both a
fantastic solution and as a source of entirely meaningless figures.
Do we need to test "real applications"? Can you do so? Anyone have
Yeah, I hope to implement it someday too. The points that were
raised in TPC2 were all to do with calling DESTROY() methods, but
-I think we can accomodate that by extending bless() to stash
+I think we can accommodate that by extending bless() to stash
extra information for objects so we track their lifetime accurately
for those that want their DESTROY() to be predictable (this will be
a speed hit, naturally, and will therefore be optional, naturally. :)
=head2 autocroak?
-This is the Fatal.pm module, so any builtin that that does
+This is the Fatal.pm module, so any builtin that does
not return success automatically die()s. If you're feeling brave, tie
this in with the unified exceptions scheme.