* str.startwith() is less errorprone that slice comparisons but not as fast.

* Fix minor typos.

pep-0008.txt

@@ -546,8 +546,8 @@ Programming Recommendations
       same API with unicode strings.
 
     - Avoid slicing strings when checking for prefixes or suffixes.
-      Use startswith() and endswith() instead, since they are faster,
-      cleaner and less error prone.  E.g.:
+      Use startswith() and endswith() instead, since they are
+      cleaner and less error prone.  For example:
 
         No:  if foo[:3] == 'bar':
         Yes: if foo.startswith('bar'):

pep-0290.txt

@@ -120,14 +120,14 @@ Replace apply() with a Direct Function Call
 '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
 
 In Python 2.3, apply() was marked for Pending Deprecation because it
-was made obsolete by the Python 1.6's introduction of * and ** in
+was made obsolete by Python 1.6's introduction of * and ** in
 function calls.  Using a direct function call was always a little
 faster than apply() because it saved the lookup for the builtin.
 Now, apply() is even slower due to its use of the warnings module.
 
 Pattern::
 
-    apply(f,args, kwds)  -->  f(*args, **kwds)
+    apply(f, args, kwds)  -->  f(*args, **kwds)
 
 
 Python 2.2 or Later
@@ -277,8 +277,8 @@ Locating: ``grep string *.py | grep import``
 ``startswith`` and ``endswith`` String Methods
 ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
 
-Use these string methods instead of slicing.  They're faster because
-no slice has to be created, and there's no risk of miscounting.
+Use these string methods instead of slicing.  No slice has to be
+created and there's no risk of miscounting.
 
 Pattern::