comment: fix spelling mistakes inside comments
PATCH 1/1 comment: fix spelling mistakes inside comments
From: Steve Kemp <[email protected]>
This commit fixes a couple of minor spelling mistakes inside comments.
---
comment: Fix spelling mistakes inside comments
This commit fixes a couple of minor spelling mistakes inside comments.
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-685%2Fskx%2Fmaster-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-685/skx/master-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/685
add-patch.c | 2 +- column.c | 2 +- grep.c | 2 +- ref-filter.c | 2 +- 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
add-patch.c +1 -1
@@ -1203,7 +1203,7 @@ static int edit_hunk_loop(struct add_p_state *s,for (;;) {int res =edit_hunk_manually (s, hunk);if (res ==0 ) { -/* abandonded */ +/* abandoned */ *hunk = backup;return -1 ; }
column.c +1 -1
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ static void display_plain(const struct string_list *list,printf ("%s%s%s" , indent, list->items[i].string, nl); } -/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/traling space */ +/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/trailing space */ static int display_cell (struct column_data *data,int initial_width,const char *empty_cell,int x,int y) {
grep.c +1 -1
@@ -1817,7 +1817,7 @@ static int grep_source_1(struct grep_opt *opt, struct grep_source *gs, int colle* We might set up the shared textconv cache data here, which * is not thread-safe. Also, get_oid_with_context() and * parse_object() might be internally called. As they are not -* currenty thread-safe and might be racy with object reading, +* currently thread-safe and might be racy with object reading, * obj_read_lock() must be called. */ grep_attr_lock ();
ref-filter.c +1 -1
@@ -1980,7 +1980,7 @@ static int for_each_fullref_in_pattern(struct ref_filter *filter,* of oids. If the given ref is a tag, check if the given tag points * at one of the oids in the given oid array. * NEEDSWORK: -* 1. Only a single level of inderection is obtained, we might want to +* 1. Only a single level of indirection is obtained, we might want to * change this to account for multiple levels (e.g. annotated tags * pointing to annotated tags pointing to a commit.) * 2. As the refs are cached we might know what refname peels to without
base-commit: 47ae905ffb98cc4d4fd90083da6bc8dab55d9ecc
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Quoted 7 lines · Steve Kemp via GitGitGadget
From: Steve Kemp <[email protected]>
This commit fixes a couple of minor spelling mistakes inside comments.
Signed-off-by Steve Kemp <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Steve Kemp <[email protected]>
Double sign-off? Perhaps keep the org.uk version, since that is the email you use for authorship.
Review
Quoted 11 lines
(quoted diff) +4
-4- /* abandonded */ + /* abandoned */ -/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/traling space */ +/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/trailing space */ - * currenty thread-safe and might be racy with object reading, + * currently thread-safe and might be racy with object reading, - * 1. Only a single level of inderection is obtained, we might want to + * 1. Only a single level of indirection is obtained, we might want to
These edits are all positive ones.
I'll leave it to more experienced contributors to comment on how a comment-only patch fits with this section Documentation/CodingGuidelines:
- Fixing style violations while working on a real change as a preparatory clean-up step is good, but otherwise avoid useless code churn for the sake of conforming to the style.
In my opinion, this change is not harmful, but also isn't super necessary. I could go either way.
Thanks,
-Stolee
Quoted 2 lines · Derrick Stolee
Double sign-off? Perhaps keep the org.uk version, since that is the email you use for authorship.
Sorry, thanks.
Quoted 2 lines
In my opinion, this change is not harmful, but also isn't super necessary. I could go either way.
If it were a white-space change, or a some trivial style-guide fixup I'd have left it alone. As it is the patch fixes a couple of mistakes, albeit trivial ones, I thought it was worth submitting.
I'd be happy to see it merged, or dropped, whichever seems most appropriate. I appreciate it is internal and not user-visible, but when I read comments with typos in them they jump out!
Updated patch, trivially, below.
Steve
Signature · 22 lines
From: Steve Kemp <[email protected]> This commit fixes a couple of minor spelling mistakes inside comments. Signed-off-by: Steve Kemp <[email protected]> --- comment: Fix spelling mistakes inside comments This commit fixes a couple of minor spelling mistakes inside comments. Signed-off-by: Steve Kemp [email protected] [[email protected]] Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-685%2Fskx%2Fmaster-v1 Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-685/skx/master-v1 Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/685 add-patch.c | 2 +- column.c | 2 +- grep.c | 2 +- ref-filter.c | 2 +- 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
add-patch.c +1 -1
@@ -1203,7 +1203,7 @@ static int edit_hunk_loop(struct add_p_state *s,for (;;) {int res =edit_hunk_manually (s, hunk);if (res ==0 ) { -/* abandonded */ +/* abandoned */ *hunk = backup;return -1 ; }
column.c +1 -1
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ static void display_plain(const struct string_list *list,printf ("%s%s%s" , indent, list->items[i].string, nl); } -/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/traling space */ +/* Print a cell to stdout with all necessary leading/trailing space */ static int display_cell (struct column_data *data,int initial_width,const char *empty_cell,int x,int y) {
grep.c +0 -0
@@ -1817,7 +1817,7 @@ static int grep_source_1(struct grep_opt *opt,
struct grep_source *gs, int colle
* We might set up the shared textconv cache data here, which
* is not thread-safe. Also, get_oid_with_context() and
* parse_object() might be internally called. As they are not
- * currenty thread-safe and might be racy with object reading,
+ * currently thread-safe and might be racy with object reading,
* obj_read_lock() must be called.
*/
grep_attr_lock();
ref-filter.c +0 -0
@@ -1980,7 +1980,7 @@ static int for_each_fullref_in_pattern(struct
ref_filter *filter,
* of oids. If the given ref is a tag, check if the given tag points
* at one of the oids in the given oid array.
* NEEDSWORK:
- * 1. Only a single level of inderection is obtained, we might want to
+ * 1. Only a single level of indirection is obtained, we might want to
* change this to account for multiple levels (e.g. annotated tags
* pointing to annotated tags pointing to a commit.)
* 2. As the refs are cached we might know what refname peels to without
base-commit: 47ae905ffb98cc4d4fd90083da6bc8dab55d9ecc
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Quoted 9 lines · Derrick Stolee
I'll leave it to more experienced contributors to comment on how a comment-only patch fits with this section
Documentation/CodingGuidelines:- Fixing style violations while working on a real change as a preparatory clean-up step is good, but otherwise avoid useless code churn for the sake of conforming to the style.
In my opinion, this change is not harmful, but also isn't super necessary. I could go either way.
Typofixes in comments has no chance of breaking things than a carelessly done code churn made in the name of cleaning up, so cost-benefit comparison is much more favourable. I'm sure that I won't be exhausted after reviewing comment-only patch as much as after reviewing code-churn only patch.
Quoted 9 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 7 lines · Derrick Stolee
I'll leave it to more experienced contributors to comment on how a comment-only patch fits with this section
Documentation/CodingGuidelines:- Fixing style violations while working on a real change as a preparatory clean-up step is good, but otherwise avoid useless code churn for the sake of conforming to the style.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
In my opinion, this change is not harmful, but also isn't super necessary. I could go either way.
Typofixes in comments has no chance of breaking things than a carelessly done code churn made in the name of cleaning up, so cost-benefit comparison is much more favourable. I'm sure that I won't be exhausted after reviewing comment-only patch as much as after reviewing code-churn only patch.
Thanks. I appreciate the context that provides more clarity.
Steve's patch with the de-duplicated sign-off has my full support.
-Stolee