Fix up a few style nits -- avoid "e.g." and "i.e." -- these make
translation more difficult, as well as reading the English more
difficult for non-native speakers.
diff --git a/Doc/lib/libprofile.tex b/Doc/lib/libprofile.tex
index 88eedf0..193f5aa 100644
--- a/Doc/lib/libprofile.tex
+++ b/Doc/lib/libprofile.tex
@@ -319,8 +319,8 @@
is the quotient of \code{tottime} divided by \code{ncalls}
\item[cumtime ]
-is the total time spent in this and all subfunctions (i.e., from
-invocation till exit). This figure is accurate \emph{even} for recursive
+is the total time spent in this and all subfunctions (from invocation
+till exit). This figure is accurate \emph{even} for recursive
functions.
\item[percall ]
@@ -331,11 +331,11 @@
\end{description}
-When there are two numbers in the first column (e.g.: \samp{43/3}),
-then the latter is the number of primitive calls, and the former is
-the actual number of calls. Note that when the function does not
-recurse, these two values are the same, and only the single figure is
-printed.
+When there are two numbers in the first column (for example,
+\samp{43/3}), then the latter is the number of primitive calls, and
+the former is the actual number of calls. Note that when the function
+does not recurse, these two values are the same, and only the single
+figure is printed.
\end{funcdesc}
@@ -355,7 +355,7 @@
the corresponding version of \module{profile}. To be specific, there is
\emph{no} file compatibility guaranteed with future versions of this
profiler, and there is no compatibility with files produced by other
-profilers (e.g., the old system profiler).
+profilers (such as the old system profiler).
If several files are provided, all the statistics for identical
functions will be coalesced, so that an overall view of several
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@
performing a strip operation, the object is considered to have its
entries in a ``random'' order, as it was just after object
initialization and loading. If \method{strip_dirs()} causes two
-function names to be indistinguishable (i.e., they are on the same
+function names to be indistinguishable (they are on the same
line of the same filename, and have the same function name), then the
statistics for these two entries are accumulated into a single entry.
\end{methoddesc}
@@ -423,7 +423,7 @@
Note that all sorts on statistics are in descending order (placing
most time consuming items first), where as name, file, and line number
-searches are in ascending order (i.e., alphabetical). The subtle
+searches are in ascending order (alphabetical). The subtle
distinction between \code{'nfl'} and \code{'stdname'} is that the
standard name is a sort of the name as printed, which means that the
embedded line numbers get compared in an odd way. For example, lines
@@ -538,10 +538,10 @@
is once again executing. As a result, functions that are called many
times, or call many functions, will typically accumulate this error.
The error that accumulates in this fashion is typically less than the
-accuracy of the clock (i.e., less than one clock tick), but it
+accuracy of the clock (less than one clock tick), but it
\emph{can} accumulate and become very significant. This profiler
provides a means of calibrating itself for a given platform so that
-this error can be probabilistically (i.e., on the average) removed.
+this error can be probabilistically (on the average) removed.
After the profiler is calibrated, it will be more accurate (in a least
square sense), but it will sometimes produce negative numbers (when
call counts are exceptionally low, and the gods of probability work
@@ -695,8 +695,8 @@
The following derived profiler simulates the old style profiler,
providing errant results on recursive functions. The reason for the
-usefulness of this profiler is that it runs faster (i.e., less
-overhead) than the old profiler. It still creates all the caller
+usefulness of this profiler is that it runs faster (less
+overhead) than the new profiler. It still creates all the caller
stats, and is quite useful when there is \emph{no} recursion in the
user's code. It is also a lot more accurate than the old profiler, as
it does not charge all its overhead time to the user's code.