From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28427 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2013 20:15:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 28406 invoked by uid 89); 18 Aug 2013 20:15:31 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 20:15:30 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1VB9No-00045u-BM from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 13:15:28 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 18 Aug 2013 13:15:28 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 21:15:26 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VB9Nk-0006W6-Ui; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 20:15:25 +0000 Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 20:15:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: =?utf-8?B?T25kxZllaiBCw61sa2E=?= CC: , Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix typos. In-Reply-To: <20130818164943.GA7418@domone> Message-ID: References: <20130813082629.GA27180@domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz> <20130818164943.GA7418@domone> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On Sun, 18 Aug 2013, Ondrej Bilka wrote: > ./ports/Changelog.aarch64: > > > * bits/atomic.h: Fix typos. > * strcmp.S: Likewise. > * strlen.S: Likewise. > * strnlen.S: Likewise. Incorrect ChangeLog entries. Paths given are always relative to the directory of the ChangeLog file, i.e. relative to the ports/ directory for all the ports/ ChangeLogs. > ./ports/Changelog: None of these belong in this file. Those for architecture-specific files go in ChangeLog.. Those for sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/generic go in ChangeLog.linux-generic. > e new larger chunk. We then carry on \n-accreting characters to the end of the > e new larger chunk. We then carry on \n+accrediting characters to the end of th > ^^ No, this change is wrong. "accreting" is a valid English word and corresponds to the intended meaning here. > the result is denormal, it will not \n-honour the double precision and generat > the result is denormal, it will not \n+honor the double precision and generate > ^^ Never mix changes that relate to choice of English language variant with actual typo fixes. If a patch claims to fix typos, it should only contain changes that are completely unambiguously typo fixes. Not changes of English language variant, not changes where you aren't sure of what was intended, not changes where colloquial usage in comments may use an abbreviated form such as "thru", or vary usage of spacing or hyphenation such as "bit field" / "bit-field" / "bitfield", or anything like that; just cases where the existing comment is simply unambiguously wrong rather than the writer's choice of informal usage. Anything that could be considered stylistic needs discussing separately (and any standards in such cases are only really needed for the manual, not random comments). > /* Restore the default. Better than \n-nother at all. */ \n ctx->classes[0] = > /* Restore the default. Better than \n+other at all. */ \n ctx->classes[0] = > ^^ I don't think this comment really makes sense either before or after the change. In such cases, a separate thread may be needed to discuss the intent of the comment. > data packet */ \n-#define ACK 04 /* acknowledgement */ \n #define ERROR 05 > data packet */ \n+#define ACK 04 /* acknowledgment */ \n #define ERROR 05 > ^^ This is another English variant issue, not a typo issue. > \n-/* Info abount the function itself. */ \n n = p > \n+/* Info amount the function itself. */ \n n = p > ^ No, "about", not "amount". When sending typo fix patches you need to read every single modified comment yourself and satisfy yourself that the change does reflect the intent of the comment. It's clear this has not been done in this case (other examples of changes that are simply wrong include "espects" -> "aspects", should be "expects", and "intrinsics" -> "intrinsic", when the original was correct). I stopped commenting here. For any subsequent revisions, in addition to the points I identified above, please keep patches down to at most 1000 lines for convenience of review, and wait until consensus has been reached on a single posted patch before sending any subsequent patches (also of at most 1000 lines). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com