Fix typos discovered by codespell

docs/source/api.rst

@@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ A basic HTTP request/response cycle looks like this:
   * and a :class:`EndOfMessage` event.
 
 And once that's finished, both sides either close the connection, or
-they go back to the top and re-use it for another request/response
+they go back to the top and reuse it for another request/response
 cycle.
 
 To coordinate this interaction, the h11 :class:`Connection` object
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ what's needed to handle the basic request/response cycle:
 
 * Server sending a :class:`Response` directly from :data:`IDLE`: This
   is used for error responses, when the client's request never arrived
-  (e.g. 408 Request Timed Out) or was unparseable gibberish (400 Bad
+  (e.g. 408 Request Timed Out) or was unparsable gibberish (400 Bad
   Request) and thus didn't register with our state machine as a real
   :class:`Request`.
 
@@ -471,7 +471,7 @@ There are four cases where these exceptions might be raised:
 
 * When calling :meth:`Connection.start_next_cycle`
   (:exc:`LocalProtocolError`): This indicates that the connection is
-  not ready to be re-used, because one or both of the peers are not in
+  not ready to be reused, because one or both of the peers are not in
   the :data:`DONE` state. The :class:`Connection` object remains
   usable, and you can try again later.
 
@@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ the remote peer. But sometimes, for one reason or another, this
 doesn't actually happen.
 
 Here's a concrete example. Suppose you're using h11 to implement an
-HTTP client that keeps a pool of connections so it can re-use them
+HTTP client that keeps a pool of connections so it can reuse them
 when possible (see :ref:`keepalive-and-pipelining`). You take a
 connection from the pool, and start to do a large upload... but then
 for some reason this gets cancelled (maybe you have a GUI and a user
@@ -518,7 +518,7 @@ successfully sent the full request, because you passed an
 you didn't, because you never sent the resulting bytes. And then –
 here's the really tricky part! – if you're not careful, you might
 think that it's OK to put this connection back into the connection
-pool and re-use it, because h11 is telling you that a full
+pool and reuse it, because h11 is telling you that a full
 request/response cycle was completed. But this is wrong; in fact you
 have to close this connection and open a new one.
 
@@ -605,10 +605,10 @@ cases:
 
 .. _keepalive-and-pipelining:
 
-Re-using a connection: keep-alive and pipelining
+Reusing a connection: keep-alive and pipelining
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-HTTP/1.1 allows a connection to be re-used for multiple
+HTTP/1.1 allows a connection to be reused for multiple
 request/response cycles (also known as "keep-alive"). This can make
 things faster by letting us skip the costly connection setup, but it
 does create some complexities: we have to keep track of whether a
@@ -635,7 +635,7 @@ these cases -- h11 will automatically add this header when
 necessary. Just worry about setting it when it's actually something
 that you're actively choosing.
 
-If you want to re-use a connection, you have to wait until both the
+If you want to reuse a connection, you have to wait until both the
 request and the response have been completed, bringing both the client
 and server to the :data:`DONE` state. Once this has happened, you can
 explicitly call :meth:`Connection.start_next_cycle` to reset both
@@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ skip past the :data:`DONE` state directly to the :data:`MUST_CLOSE` or
 thing you can legally do is to close this connection and make a new
 one.
 
-HTTP/1.1 also allows for a more aggressive form of connection re-use,
+HTTP/1.1 also allows for a more aggressive form of connection reuse,
 in which a client sends multiple requests in quick succession, and
 then waits for the responses to stream back in order
 ("pipelining"). This is generally considered to have been a bad idea,

docs/source/basic-usage.rst

@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ For some servers, we'd have to stop here, because they require a new
 connection for every request/response. But, this server is smarter
 than that -- it supports `keep-alive
 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_persistent_connection>`_, so we
-can re-use this connection to send another request. There's a few ways
+can reuse this connection to send another request. There's a few ways
 we can tell. First, if it didn't, then it would have closed the
 connection already, and we would have gotten a
 :class:`ConnectionClosed` event on our last call to

docs/source/changes.rst

@@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ Backwards compatible changes:
   originates locally (which produce a 500 status code) versus errors
   caused by remote misbehavior (which produce a 4xx status code).
 
-* Changed the :data:`PRODUCT_ID` from ``h11/<verson>`` to
+* Changed the :data:`PRODUCT_ID` from ``h11/<version>`` to
   ``python-h11/<version>``. (This is similar to what requests uses,
   and much more searchable than plain h11.)
 

examples/trio-server.py

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
 #
 # - The error handling policy here is somewhat crude as well. It handles a lot
 #   of cases perfectly, but there are corner cases where the ideal behavior is
-#   more debateable. For example, if a client starts uploading a large
+#   more debatable. For example, if a client starts uploading a large
 #   request, uses 100-Continue, and we send an error response, then we'll shut
 #   down the connection immediately (for well-behaved clients) or after
 #   spending TIMEOUT seconds reading and discarding their upload (for
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@
 #   and wasting your bandwidth if this is what it takes to guarantee that they
 #   see your error response. Up to you, really.
 #
-# - Another example of a debateable choice: if a response handler errors out
+# - Another example of a debatable choice: if a response handler errors out
 #   without having done *anything* -- hasn't started responding, hasn't read
 #   the request body -- then this connection actually is salvagable, if the
 #   server sends an error response + reads and discards the request body. This
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ async def http_serve(stream):
             return
         else:
             try:
-                wrapper.info("trying to re-use connection")
+                wrapper.info("trying to reuse connection")
                 wrapper.conn.start_next_cycle()
             except h11.ProtocolError:
                 states = wrapper.conn.states

h11/_headers.py

@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@
 # message"
 # (and there are several headers where the order indicates a preference)
 #
-# Multiple occurences of the same header:
+# Multiple occurrences of the same header:
 # "A sender MUST NOT generate multiple header fields with the same field name
 # in a message unless either the entire field value for that header field is
 # defined as a comma-separated list [or the header is Set-Cookie which gets a
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ class Headers(Sequence[Tuple[bytes, bytes]]):
 
     Internally we actually store the representation as three-tuples,
     including both the raw original casing, in order to preserve casing
-    over-the-wire, and the lowercased name, for case-insensitive comparisions.
+    over-the-wire, and the lowercased name, for case-insensitive comparisons.
 
     r = Request(
         method="GET",

h11/tests/test_connection.py

@@ -652,7 +652,7 @@ def setup() -> ConnectionPair:
         for conn in p.conns:
             assert conn.states == {CLIENT: DONE, SERVER: SEND_BODY}
         p.send(SERVER, EndOfMessage())
-        # Check that re-use is still allowed after a denial
+        # Check that reuse is still allowed after a denial
         for conn in p.conns:
             conn.start_next_cycle()
 

h11/tests/test_state.py

@@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ def test_ConnectionState_reuse() -> None:
     with pytest.raises(LocalProtocolError):
         cs.start_next_cycle()
 
-    # Succesful protocol switch
+    # Successful protocol switch
 
     cs = ConnectionState()
     cs.process_client_switch_proposal(_SWITCH_UPGRADE)