Typo in arch/mips/dec/wbflush.c

DISCUSSION Rusty Russell 2 participants 2 messages Jun 25, 2002 1 message not in the archive

lore

Share & tools

lore

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 20020624215505.GA7864@galileo

Rusty Russell

author

2002-06-25 16:43 UTC #1 lore raw

In message <20020624215505.GA7864@galileo> you write:

Quoted 1 line

--- linux.orig-2.4.19-rc1/arch/mips/dec/wbflush.c Fri Oct 5 13:06:51 200

Review line 103

Quoted 10 lines

+++ linux/arch/mips/dec/wbflush.c Mon Jun 24 15:49:53 2002

(quoted diff) +1 -1

@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@
 }
 
 /*
- * The DS500/2x0 doesnt need to write back the WB.
+ * The DS500/2x0 doesn't need to write back the WB.
  */
 static void wbflush_kn03(void)
 {

Hmm...

I've only applied the one that was an actually a definite
spellfix. While I prefer to use apostrophes, it's a common abbreviation to skip it: 1/10 according to google. Compare with another common misspelling (recieve) which is 1/50.

Given there is a non-zero cost (patch conflict with developers) even with trivial patches, I've decided not to apply your 41 "doesnt"->"doesn't" patches, unless someone convinces me otherwise.

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.

Maciej W. Rozycki

2002-06-25 17:24 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 16 lines · Rusty Russell

In message <20020624215505.GA7864@galileo> you write:
Quoted 1 line
--- linux.orig-2.4.19-rc1/arch/mips/dec/wbflush.c Fri Oct 5 13:06:51 200
1
Review line 103
Quoted 10 lines
+++ linux/arch/mips/dec/wbflush.c Mon Jun 24 15:49:53 2002
(quoted diff) +1 -1
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@
 }
 
 /*
- * The DS500/2x0 doesnt need to write back the WB.
+ * The DS500/2x0 doesn't need to write back the WB.
  */
 static void wbflush_kn03(void)
 {
Hmm...

Quoted 8 lines

I've only applied the one that was an actually a definite
spellfix. While I prefer to use apostrophes, it's a common abbreviation to skip it: 1/10 according to google. Compare with another common misspelling (recieve) which is 1/50.
Given there is a non-zero cost (patch conflict with developers) even with trivial patches, I've decided not to apply your 41 "doesnt"->"doesn't" patches, unless someone convinces me otherwise.

There is a formal error in the sentence as well, actually, but I wouldn't
care as the file is to be majorly rewritten (changes are ready and awaiting an approval of related stuff) and the comment will be removed anyway.

Signature · 3 lines

+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+        e-mail: [email protected], PGP key available        +