From e10e42c814f4cadd615c13424ffe87ffa86687d6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: SDL Wiki Bot Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:58:20 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Sync SDL3 wiki -> header [ci skip] --- include/SDL3/SDL_asyncio.h | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/SDL3/SDL_asyncio.h b/include/SDL3/SDL_asyncio.h index ee13bf3ae6..33124e93ff 100644 --- a/include/SDL3/SDL_asyncio.h +++ b/include/SDL3/SDL_asyncio.h @@ -67,14 +67,14 @@ * * ## Best Practices * - * Simple non-blocking i/o--for an app that just wants to pick up data + * Simple non-blocking I/O--for an app that just wants to pick up data * whenever it's ready without losing framerate waiting on disks to spin--can * use whatever pattern works well for the program. In this case, simply call * SDL_ReadAsyncIO, or maybe SDL_LoadFileAsync, as needed. Once a frame, call * SDL_GetAsyncIOResult to check for any completed tasks and deal with the * data as it arrives. * - * If two separate pieces of the same program need their own i/o, it is legal + * If two separate pieces of the same program need their own I/O, it is legal * for each to create their own queue. This will prevent either piece from * accidentally consuming the other's completed tasks. Each queue does require * some amount of resources, but it is not an overwhelming cost. Do not make a @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ * were submitted, so it doesn't generally matter what order tasks are * started. * - * One async i/o queue can be shared by multiple threads, or one thread can + * One async I/O queue can be shared by multiple threads, or one thread can * have more than one queue, but the most efficient way--if ruthless * efficiency is the goal--is to have one queue per thread, with multiple * threads working in parallel, and attempt to keep each queue loaded with