Clean up some awkward wording around the +spp flag.

This issue was pointed out by lpgauth in #erlounge. While the intention is
clear, the original wording was a bit dodgy. I'm no grammarian--though I am a
native speaker--so it's quite possible the new wording I've introduced is not
impeachable. Should be idiomatic, though.

Signed-off-by: Brian L. Troutwine <[email protected]>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/erts/doc/src/erlang.xml b/erts/doc/src/erlang.xml
index a498fc24df..13665f3e7c 100644
--- a/erts/doc/src/erlang.xml
+++ b/erts/doc/src/erlang.xml
@@ -2886,11 +2886,11 @@ os_prompt% </pre>
           <tag><marker id="open_port_parallelism"><c>{parallelism, Boolean}</c></marker></tag>
           <item>
             <p>Set scheduler hint for port parallelism. If set to <c>true</c>,
-	    the VM will schedule port tasks when it by this can improve the
+	    the VM will schedule port tasks when doing so will improve
 	    parallelism in the system. If set to <c>false</c>, the VM will
-	    try to perform port tasks immediately and by this improving the
-	    latency at the expense of parallelism. The default can be set on
-	    system startup by passing the
+	    try to perform port tasks immediately, improving latency at the
+            expense of parallelism. The default can be set on system startup
+            by passing the
 	    <seealso marker="erl#+spp">+spp</seealso> command line argument
 	    to <seealso marker="erl">erl(1)</seealso>.
 	    </p>