Fix grammar and punctuation.

book.tex

@@ -2460,7 +2460,7 @@ start:
 \end{minipage}
 \end{tabular} \\
 
-In the output of \code{select-instructions}, there is a entry for
+In the output of \code{select-instructions}, there is an entry for
 \code{locals-types} in the $\itm{info}$ of the \code{Program} node,
 which is needed here so that we have the list of variables that should
 be assigned to homes. The support code computes the
@@ -2801,7 +2801,7 @@ If there are more than six arguments, then the convention is to use
 space on the frame of the caller for the rest of the
 arguments. However, in Chapter~\ref{ch:functions} we arrange to never
 need more than six arguments. For now, the only function we care about
-is \code{read\_int} and it takes zero argument.
+is \code{read\_int} and it takes zero arguments.
 %
 The register \code{rax} is for the return value of a function.
 
@@ -2812,7 +2812,7 @@ example from the caller point of view and then from the callee point
 of view.
 
 The program makes two calls to the \code{read} function.  Also, the
-variable \code{x} is in-use during the second call to \code{read}, so
+variable \code{x} is in use during the second call to \code{read}, so
 we need to make sure that the value in \code{x} does not get
 accidentally wiped out by the call to \code{read}.  One obvious
 approach is to save all the values in caller-saved registers to the
@@ -2826,16 +2826,16 @@ location in the first place. Or better yet, if we can arrange for
 \code{x} to be placed in a callee-saved register, then it won't need
 to be saved and restored during function calls.
 
-The approach that we recommend for variables that are in-use during a
+The approach that we recommend for variables that are in use during a
 function call is to either assign them to callee-saved registers or to
 spill them to the stack. On the other hand, for variables that are not
-in-use during a function call, we try the following alternatives in
+in use during a function call, we try the following alternatives in
 order 1) look for an available caller-saved register (to leave room
 for other variables in the callee-saved register), 2) look for a
 callee-saved register, and 3) spill the variable to the stack.
 
 It is straightforward to implement this approach in a graph coloring
-register allocator. First, we know which variables are in-use during
+register allocator. First, we know which variables are in use during
 every function call because we compute that information for every
 instruction (Section~\ref{sec:liveness-analysis-r1}). Second, when we
 build the interference graph (Section~\ref{sec:build-interference}),
@@ -3146,7 +3146,7 @@ locations if they are live at the same time, that is, if they
 interfere with each other.
 
 The most obvious way to compute the interference graph is to look at
-the set of live location between each statement in the program and add
+the set of live locations between each statement in the program and add
 an edge to the graph for every pair of variables in the same set.
 This approach is less than ideal for two reasons. First, it can be
 expensive because it takes $O(n^2)$ time to look at every pair in a
@@ -3305,7 +3305,7 @@ sure that two variables do not get mapped to the same register if the
 two variables interfere with each other.  Thinking about the
 interference graph, this means that adjacent vertices must be mapped
 to different registers.  If we think of registers as colors, the
-register allocation problem becomes the widely-studied graph coloring
+register allocation problem becomes the widely studied graph coloring
 problem~\citep{Balakrishnan:1996ve,Rosen:2002bh}.
 
 The reader may be more familiar with the graph coloring problem than he
@@ -3395,7 +3395,7 @@ such as \code{rax}, are assigned to negative integers. In particular,
 we assign $-1$ to \code{rax} and $-2$ to \code{rsp}.
 
 One might wonder why we include registers at all in the liveness
-analysis and interference graph, for example, we never allocate a
+analysis and interference graph.  For example, we never allocate a
 variable to \code{rax} and \code{rsp}, so it would be harmless to
 leave them out.  As we see in Chapter~\ref{ch:tuples}, when we begin
 to use register for passing arguments to functions, it will be
@@ -3403,7 +3403,7 @@ necessary for those registers to appear in the interference graph
 because those registers will also be assigned to variables, and we
 don't want those two uses to encroach on each other. Regarding
 registers such as \code{rax} and \code{rsp} that are not used for
-variables, we could omit them from the interference graph but that
+variables, we could omit them from the interference graph, but that
 would require adding special cases to our algorithm, which would
 complicate the logic for little gain.
 
@@ -3741,7 +3741,7 @@ notify the priority queue when their saturation changes.
   \begin{description}
   \item[$\LP\code{make-pqueue}\,\itm{cmp}\RP$] constructs an empty
     priority queue that uses the $\itm{cmp}$ predicate to determine
-    whether its first argument has lower or equal priority to its
+    whether its first argument has priority lower than or equal to its
     second argument.
   \item[$\LP\code{pqueue-count}\,\itm{queue}\RP$] returns the number of
     items in the queue.
@@ -7465,7 +7465,7 @@ If there are
 more than six arguments, then the convention is to use space on the
 frame of the caller for the rest of the arguments. However, to ease
 the implementation of efficient tail calls
-(Section~\ref{sec:tail-call}), we arrange to never need more than six
+(Section~\ref{sec:tail-call}), we arrange never to need more than six
 arguments.
 %
 Also recall that the register \code{rax} is for the return value of