Copilot commented on code in PR #2242: URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/2242#discussion_r2116148341
########## src/spec/doc/_type-checking-extensions.adoc: ########## @@ -1062,14 +1062,14 @@ type of the dynamic call is a `Robot`, subsequent calls will be done statically! Some would wonder why the static compiler doesn't do this by default without an extension. It is a design decision: -* if the code is statically compiled, we normally want type safety and best performance -* so if unrecognized variables/method calls are made dynamic, you loose type safety, but also all support for typos at -compile time! +* if the code is statically compiled, we normally want type safety and the best performance +* if unrecognized variables/method calls are made dynamic, you lose type safety, but also all support for catching typos Review Comment: [nitpick] Consider rephrasing this bullet point for improved clarity; for example, 'if unrecognized variables or method calls are made dynamic, not only is type safety lost, but support for catching typos at compile time is also diminished.' -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@groovy.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
