--- AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm	2008/04/25 08:41:38	1.76
+++ AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm	2008/04/25 09:11:59	1.80
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@
 my variables are only visible after the statement in which they are
 declared.
 
-=head2 IO WATCHERS
+=head2 I/O WATCHERS
 
 You can create an I/O watcher by calling the C<< AnyEvent->io >> method
 with the following mandatory key-value pairs as arguments:
@@ -708,7 +708,7 @@
 
 =head1 EXAMPLE PROGRAM
 
-The following program uses an IO watcher to read data from STDIN, a timer
+The following program uses an I/O watcher to read data from STDIN, a timer
 to display a message once per second, and a condition variable to quit the
 program when the user enters quit:
 
@@ -869,10 +869,15 @@
 over the event loops themselves (and to give you an impression of the
 speed of various event loops), here is a benchmark of various supported
 event models natively and with anyevent. The benchmark creates a lot of
-timers (with a zero timeout) and io watchers (watching STDOUT, a pty, to
+timers (with a zero timeout) and I/O watchers (watching STDOUT, a pty, to
 become writable, which it is), lets them fire exactly once and destroys
 them again.
 
+Rewriting the benchmark to use many different sockets instead of using
+the same filehandle for all I/O watchers results in a much longer runtime
+(socket creation is expensive), but qualitatively the same figures, so it
+was not used.
+
 =head2 Explanation of the columns
 
 I<watcher> is the number of event watchers created/destroyed. Since
@@ -918,9 +923,9 @@
 The benchmark does I<not> measure scalability of the event loop very
 well. For example, a select-based event loop (such as the pure perl one)
 can never compete with an event loop that uses epoll when the number of
-file descriptors grows high. In this benchmark, only a single filehandle
-is used (although some of the AnyEvent adaptors dup() its file descriptor
-to worka round bugs).
+file descriptors grows high. In this benchmark, all events become ready at
+the same time, so select/poll-based implementations get an unnatural speed
+boost.
 
 C<EV> is the sole leader regarding speed and memory use, which are both
 maximal/minimal, respectively. Even when going through AnyEvent, there are
@@ -930,10 +935,11 @@
 
 The pure perl implementation is hit in a few sweet spots (both the
 zero timeout and the use of a single fd hit optimisations in the perl
-interpreter and the backend itself). Nevertheless tis shows that it
-adds very little overhead in itself. Like any select-based backend its
-performance becomes really bad with lots of file descriptors, of course,
-but this was not subject of this benchmark.
+interpreter and the backend itself, and all watchers become ready at the
+same time). Nevertheless this shows that it adds very little overhead in
+itself. Like any select-based backend its performance becomes really bad
+with lots of file descriptors (and few of them active), of course, but
+this was not subject of this benchmark.
 
 The C<Event> module has a relatively high setup and callback invocation cost,
 but overall scores on the third place.
@@ -958,7 +964,7 @@
 select-based backend or the Event module) shows abysmal performance and
 memory usage: Watchers use almost 30 times as much memory as EV watchers,
 and 10 times as much memory as both Event or EV via AnyEvent. Watcher
-invocation is almost 700 times slower than with AnyEvent's pure perl
+invocation is almost 900 times slower than with AnyEvent's pure perl
 implementation. The design of the POE adaptor class in AnyEvent can not
 really account for this, as session creation overhead is small compared
 to execution of the state machine, which is coded pretty optimally within