@@ -230,10 +230,10 @@ namespace ts {
230230 },
231231 isContextSensitive,
232232 getFullyQualifiedName,
233- getResolvedSignature: (node, candidatesOutArray, agumentCount ) =>
234- getResolvedSignatureWorker(node, candidatesOutArray, agumentCount , CheckMode.Normal),
235- getResolvedSignatureForSignatureHelp: (node, candidatesOutArray, agumentCount ) =>
236- getResolvedSignatureWorker(node, candidatesOutArray, agumentCount , CheckMode.IsForSignatureHelp),
233+ getResolvedSignature: (node, candidatesOutArray, argumentCount ) =>
234+ getResolvedSignatureWorker(node, candidatesOutArray, argumentCount , CheckMode.Normal),
235+ getResolvedSignatureForSignatureHelp: (node, candidatesOutArray, argumentCount ) =>
236+ getResolvedSignatureWorker(node, candidatesOutArray, argumentCount , CheckMode.IsForSignatureHelp),
237237 getExpandedParameters,
238238 hasEffectiveRestParameter,
239239 getConstantValue: nodeIn => {
@@ -3183,7 +3183,7 @@ namespace ts {
31833183 let containers = getContainersOfSymbol(symbol, enclosingDeclaration);
31843184 // If we're trying to reference some object literal in, eg `var a = { x: 1 }`, the symbol for the literal, `__object`, is distinct
31853185 // from the symbol of the declaration it is being assigned to. Since we can use the declaration to refer to the literal, however,
3186- // we'd like to make that connection here - potentially causing us to paint the declararation 's visibiility , and therefore the literal.
3186+ // we'd like to make that connection here - potentially causing us to paint the declaration 's visibility , and therefore the literal.
31873187 const firstDecl: Node = first(symbol.declarations);
31883188 if (!length(containers) && meaning & SymbolFlags.Value && firstDecl && isObjectLiteralExpression(firstDecl)) {
31893189 if (firstDecl.parent && isVariableDeclaration(firstDecl.parent) && firstDecl === firstDecl.parent.initializer) {
@@ -7732,10 +7732,10 @@ namespace ts {
77327732 }
77337733 }
77347734 // If the target is a union type or if we are intersecting with types belonging to one of the
7735- // disjoint domans , we may end up producing a constraint that hasn't been examined before.
7735+ // disjoint domains , we may end up producing a constraint that hasn't been examined before.
77367736 if (constraints && (targetIsUnion || hasDisjointDomainType)) {
77377737 if (hasDisjointDomainType) {
7738- // We add any types belong to one of the disjoint domans because they might cause the final
7738+ // We add any types belong to one of the disjoint domains because they might cause the final
77397739 // intersection operation to reduce the union constraints.
77407740 for (const t of type.types) {
77417741 if (t.flags & TypeFlags.DisjointDomains) {
@@ -7785,7 +7785,7 @@ namespace ts {
77857785 }
77867786 if (constraintDepth >= 50) {
77877787 // We have reached 50 recursive invocations of getImmediateBaseConstraint and there is a
7788- // very high likelyhood we're dealing with an infinite generic type that perpetually generates
7788+ // very high likelihood we're dealing with an infinite generic type that perpetually generates
77897789 // new type identities as we descend into it. We stop the recursion here and mark this type
77907790 // and the outer types as having circular constraints.
77917791 error(currentNode, Diagnostics.Type_instantiation_is_excessively_deep_and_possibly_infinite);
0 commit comments