This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 1/*] Fix common typos.
- From: Oleg Endo <oleg dot endo at t-online dot de>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: OndÅej BÃlka <neleai at seznam dot cz>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:20:43 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/*] Fix common typos.
- References: <20130721143204 dot GA27788 at domone> <E43E7A53-A22D-4695-BC6C-4B8551A393B5 at comcast dot net>
On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 09:35 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:32 AM, OndÅej BÃlka <neleai@seznam.cz> wrote:
> > This is series of typo fixing patches. They are generated with stylepp
> > https://github.com/neleai/stylepp
> > which makes patch generation very effective.
>
> I've checked in most changes to Objective-C things and test suite things after reviewing all those changes. I agreed with most of the work, except ok -> OK. We don't need to scream in the source, and ok I feel is a fine english word, despite what an expert might think (they would burn us (me) at the grammar stake. They merely trail us in language adoption. :-)
>
> One part I will throw out here, in gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/sh/pr54760-4.c:
>
> - and its use when a function call is inbetween, when GBR is a call used
> + and its use when a function call is between, when GBR is a call used
>
> I think this should be:
>
> - and its use when a function call is inbetween, when GBR is a call used
> + and its use when a function call is in-between, when GBR is a call used
>
> If someone wants to try and counter this, please, I'd favor an expert that can clarify why it would be preferable.
If I remember correctly, it was me who wrote it in the first place.
It should be 'a function call in between, when'.
Thanks for catching it.
Cheers,
Oleg