review comments

- some API docs
- require names for top-level actors
- allow names for children
- flag error when no channels declared

akka-docs/rst/scala/code/docs/channels/ChannelDocSpec.scala

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ object ChannelDocSpec {
 
   class Parent extends Actor
     with Channels[TNil, (Stats, Nothing) :+: (GetChild.type, ChildRef) :+: TNil] {
-    
+
     val child = createChild(new Child)
 
     channel[GetChild.type] { (_, snd) ⇒ ChildRef(child) -!-> snd }
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ class ChannelDocSpec extends AkkaSpec {
 
     // type given just for demonstration purposes
     val latch: ChannelRef[(Request, Reply) :+: (String, Int) :+: TNil] =
-      ChannelExt(system).actorOf(new Latch(target))
+      ChannelExt(system).actorOf(new Latch(target), "latch")
 
     "hello" -!-> latch
     //#processing
@@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ class ChannelDocSpec extends AkkaSpec {
     // 
     // then it is used somewhat like this:
     // 
-    
-    val parent = ChannelExt(system).actorOf(new Parent)
+
+    val parent = ChannelExt(system).actorOf(new Parent, "parent")
     parent <-!- GetChild
     val child = expectMsgType[ChildRef].child // this assumes TestKit context
 

akka-docs/rst/scala/typed-channels.rst

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ an error, since the companion object ``Command`` is not an instance of type
 
 While this example looks pretty simple, the implications are profound. In order
 to be useful, the system must be as reliable as you would expect a type system
-to be. This means that unless you step outside of the it (i.e. doing the
+to be. This means that unless you step outside of it (i.e. doing the
 equivalent of ``.asInstanceOf[_]``) you shall be protected, failures shall be
 recognized and flagged. There are a number of challenges included in this
 requirement, which are discussed in the following sections. If you are reading