@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ want it to be.
1212
1313It's a basic assumption in this paper that Swift shouldn't make an
1414implicit promise to exactly match the default platform calling
15- convention. That is, if a C or ObjC programmer manages to derive the
15+ convention. That is, if a C or Objective-C programmer manages to derive the
1616address of a Swift function, we don't have to promise that an obvious
1717translation of the type of that function will be correctly callable
1818from C. For example, this wouldn't be guaranteed to work::
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ from C. For example, this wouldn't be guaranteed to work::
2626We do sometimes need to be able to match C conventions, both to use
2727them and to generate implementations of them, but that level of
2828compatibility should be opt-in and site-specific. If Swift would
29- benefit from internally using a better convention than C/ObjC uses,
29+ benefit from internally using a better convention than C/Objective-C uses,
3030and switching to that convention doesn't damage the dynamic abilities
3131of our target platforms (debugging, dtrace, stack traces, unwinding,
3232etc.), there should be nothing preventing us from doing so. (If we
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ physical conventions.
139139Ownership transfer conventions
140140==============================
141141
142- Arguments and results that require cleanup, like an ObjC object
142+ Arguments and results that require cleanup, like an Objective-C object
143143reference or a non-POD C++ object, raise two questions about
144144responsibility: who is responsible for cleaning it up, and when?
145145
@@ -804,7 +804,7 @@ of things:
804804 at this level both because it is affected by abstraction patterns
805805 and because different tuple elements may use different ownership
806806 conventions. (This is most likely for imported APIs, where it's the
807- tuple elements that correspond to specific C or ObjC parameters.)
807+ tuple elements that correspond to specific C or Objective-C parameters.)
808808
809809 This completely eliminates top-level tuple types from the function
810810 signature except when they are a target of abstraction and thus are
0 commit comments