diff --git a/src/memory-management/comparison.md b/src/memory-management/comparison.md
index 91c00d9f..8d8055f7 100644
--- a/src/memory-management/comparison.md
+++ b/src/memory-management/comparison.md
@@ -4,31 +4,31 @@ Here is a rough comparison of the memory management techniques.
 
 ## Pros of Different Memory Management Techniques
 
-* Manual like C
-  * No runtime overhead
-* Automatic like Java
-  * Fully automatic
-  * Safe and correct
-* Scope-based like C++
-  * Partially automatic
-  * No runtime overhead
-* Compiler-enforced scope-based like Rust
-  * Enforced by compiler
-  * No runtime overhead
-  * Safe and correct
+* Manual like C:
+  * No runtime overhead.
+* Automatic like Java:
+  * Fully automatic.
+  * Safe and correct.
+* Scope-based like C++:
+  * Partially automatic.
+  * No runtime overhead.
+* Compiler-enforced scope-based like Rust:
+  * Enforced by compiler.
+  * No runtime overhead.
+  * Safe and correct.
 
 ## Cons of Different Memory Management Techniques
 
 * Manual like C:
-  * Use-after-free
-  * Double-frees
-  * Memory leaks
-* Automatic like Java
-  * Garbage collection pauses
-  * Destructors delays
-* Scope-based like C++
-  * Complex, opt-in by programmer
-  * Potential for use-after-free
-* Compiler-enforced and scope-based like Rust
-  * Some upfront complexity
-  * Can reject valid programs
+  * Use-after-free.
+  * Double-frees.
+  * Memory leaks.
+* Automatic like Java:
+  * Garbage collection pauses.
+  * Destructors delays.
+* Scope-based like C++:
+  * Complex, opt-in by programmer.
+  * Potential for use-after-free.
+* Compiler-enforced and scope-based like Rust:
+  * Some upfront complexity.
+  * Can reject valid programs.