mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* a couple consistent misspellings that could be fixed
@ 2014-06-26 18:28 Robert P. J. Day
  2014-06-26 19:09 ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2014-06-26 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: U-Boot Version 2 (barebox)


  being the pedant that i am, i notice the following widespread
misspellings in the barebox codebase:

* "existance" (should be existence)

  actually, not that widespread, only three, all comments so easy to
fix

* "persistant" (should be persistent)

  this one is much uglier -- a couple dozen, including its use in
runnable code itself. just run:

  $ grep -r persistant *

to see what i mean.

  what's the policy for fixing a spelling error that spills over from
the comments into compilable code itself?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: a couple consistent misspellings that could be fixed
  2014-06-26 18:28 a couple consistent misspellings that could be fixed Robert P. J. Day
@ 2014-06-26 19:09 ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2014-06-26 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: U-Boot Version 2 (barebox)

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:28:21PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   being the pedant that i am, i notice the following widespread
> misspellings in the barebox codebase:
> 
> * "existance" (should be existence)
> 
>   actually, not that widespread, only three, all comments so easy to
> fix
> 
> * "persistant" (should be persistent)
> 
>   this one is much uglier -- a couple dozen, including its use in
> runnable code itself. just run:
> 
>   $ grep -r persistant *

Uh, quite a few.

> 
> to see what i mean.
> 
>   what's the policy for fixing a spelling error that spills over from
> the comments into compilable code itself?

You can fix them all in a single patch, no need to split it up. At least
not as long there's not a function which uses 'persistent' and
'persistant' as two different variables ;)

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-26 19:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-06-26 18:28 a couple consistent misspellings that could be fixed Robert P. J. Day
2014-06-26 19:09 ` Sascha Hauer

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox