Possible English typos

[changkun]

   p8  amzed -> amazed?

  p10 Deprecation is not completely unusable, it is only intended to imply that programmers
      will disappear from future standards and should be avoided.
 -> I am not a native English speaker, but I think "programmers" above should be
         "features" or something like this.

  p10 cpp char *str = "hello world!"; // A deprecation warning will appear
      -> Isn't "cpp" unnecessary (and wrong)?

  p12 (CXX)(SOURCE_CXX) (OBJECT SC )(LDFLAGS_COMMON) -o (TARGET)clean : rm − rf ∗ .o(
      TARGET) -> I think "clean" make target should be on a separate line. Plus, $ should
      prefix the parentheses, like $(CXX).


 p16 so even if this behavior is in most compilers Both support, but
     -> so even if this behavior is supported by most compilers, but

 p16 This keyword explicitly tells the compiler that it should verify that len_foo should be
     a compile time. Constant expression. -> a compile time constant expression.

 p17 which causes us to rename the other when we need to traverse the entire std::vectors
     again. A variable. -> I guess "A variable" should be deleted or appended earlier "rename the other
     variable when".

 p18 which is The initialization of class -> which is the initialization of class
     (Note that this kind of abrupt capitalisations are fairly common.)

 p32 Line 15 // inhereit constructor => inheritance constructor

 p36 but you don’t want to use a function to name a function -> I guess the following is
     better/more correct: "but you don’t want to use name to call a function"

 p36 for the things in [catch list] -> for the things in [capture list]

 p39 Although this part of the standard library is part of the standard library =>
     I guess the following is better/more correct:
     Although the features are part of the standard library and not found in runtime,

 p41 that is, A value => that is, a value

 p42 Line 24: // string,string,string, => string,string,string,string

 p45 reference contraction rule => I guess "reference collapsing rule" is a better name.

 p53 except for std::pair There seems to be => there (Not capital T).

 p55 , eliminating the display call delete, => , eliminating to call delete,

 p57 Line 35: "p2 was destroied" => "p2 was destroyed"

 p57 Line 40: destroied => destroyed

 p58 Line 11: destroied => destroyed

 p58 Line 18: destroied => destroyed

 p58 no The way => no way

 p59 Figure 2: Untranslated word, Chinese?

 p66 std::lock_gurad => std::lock_guard

 p66 RAII guarantees the exceptional security of the code while losing the simplicity of the code.
     => I guess here you are promoting RAII and the following is better:
     RAII guarantees the exceptional security of the code while keeping the simplicity of the code.

 p69 notd_one() of std ::condition_variable is used to wake up a thread =>
     notify_one() of std ::condition_variable is used to wake up a thread

 p71 Intuitively, a = 5;int2seems => Intuitively, a = 5; seems

Many thanks to Oguz Kupusoglu.