Merge pull request #112 from joernio/xavierp/typos

quick typos

Author: xavierpinho

docs.joern.io/content/frontends/java.md

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ CallNode
     ├── Argument[0]: this 
     ├── Argument[1]: param1
     ├── Argument[2]: param2
-    └── Argument[3]: parma3
+    └── Argument[3]: param3
 ```
 Note that the method signature in the Java code only has three arguments, but the call AST has four. There is an implicit argument that is added in the 0th position, which is the `receiver` of the call node. In this case since the call is invoking a method defined in the same class, so an implicit `this` argument is added at `arg[0]` as the `receiver` of the call. Note that dynamic methods (i.e methods without the `static` modifier) also have a `this` 0th parameter that lines up with the `this` 0th argument in the `CallNode`.
 
@@ -68,4 +68,4 @@ class Baz {
 ```
 ![Image of a simple call AST for a static function in a different class in Java](/images/java_static_call.png)
 
-The structure of the call AST for the static function is the same as it is for the simple call above, the only difference is that the `receiver` (and thus `arg[0]`) of the call has now changed to `Baz` since the method being invoked is defined in the `Baz` class.
+The structure of the call AST for the static function is the same as it is for the simple call above, the only difference is that the `receiver` (and thus `arg[0]`) of the call has now changed to `Baz` since the method being invoked is defined in the `Baz` class.

docs.joern.io/content/frontends/javascript.md

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ CallNode
     ├── Argument[0]: this 
     ├── Argument[1]: param1
     ├── Argument[2]: param2
-    └── Argument[3]: parma3
+    └── Argument[3]: param3
 ```
 Simple calls are modelled slightly different in dynamic languages (such as JavaScript) when compared to static languages. In dynamic languages `arg[0]` is no longer the receiver of the call, but instead is the object that holds the property which is the receiver of the call. There is also a 5th argument introduced, which is `arg[-1]`.
 
@@ -56,4 +56,4 @@ class Baz {
 }
 ```
 ![Image of a simple call AST for a static function in a different class in JavaScript](/images/javascript_static_call.png)
-The structure of the call AST is mostly the same as for a simple call, with the receiver of the call now just being `Baz.baz` instead of `self.bar`.
+The structure of the call AST is mostly the same as for a simple call, with the receiver of the call now just being `Baz.baz` instead of `self.bar`.

docs.joern.io/content/frontends/python.md

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ CallNode
     ├── Argument[0]: self 
     ├── Argument[1]: param1
     ├── Argument[2]: param2
-    └── Argument[3]: parma3
+    └── Argument[3]: param3
 ```
 Simple calls are modelled slightly different in dynamic languages (such as Python) when compared to static languages. In dynamic languages `arg[0]` is no longer the receiver of the call, but instead is the object that holds the property which is the receiver of the call. There is also a 5th argument introduced, which is `arg[-1]`. In Python, the `self` argument is the same as the `this` argument in other languages.
 
@@ -56,4 +56,4 @@ class Baz:
     pass
 ```
 ![Image of a simple call AST for a function in a different class in Python](/images/python_member_call.png)
-The structure of the call AST is mostly the same as for a simple call, with the receiver of the call now just being `Baz.baz` instead of `self.bar`.
+The structure of the call AST is mostly the same as for a simple call, with the receiver of the call now just being `Baz.baz` instead of `self.bar`.