From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 95e8c7d 1/2: ; Fix typos Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2020 01:14:40 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20201009134249.15265.31644@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20201009134252.81B3620A15@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83tuv35upc.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7r26037.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24061"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rpluim@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 10 10:31:40 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kRAI0-00069x-4c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 10:31:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48594 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRAHz-0007W9-4a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 04:31:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43808) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRA1d-0003PW-1m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 04:14:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]:34543) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRA1b-000089-Cx; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 04:14:44 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id u8so16421389ejg.1; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 01:14:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ed52U1lbvHxoWCPWul73thdrjL6RlwZEOTN6RvCBMLk=; b=CVOIGEdaoGRYzSNhqugtg4H1CzC/rcR3cCQVy+Z/xz3Jr5z4Pv58S8mBepI/Skagl7 JRRxhMp2lIf+qg49dqxd1e4nBRp0gFGBdj0iclRvMIOWsGuhszh3P/xYFmTz20Ek6Jkd OitoEwhQxhX5yHpnkGFVdm0pM/FEE7c6b54FTJNNfPg8IRzCMw93TDEkygroFCrr1GEl +d4c0LrK4In4iiuh1ALvEkWGnvVEdsbuEz2u+vYg0dxvUEA4NTfpt3U1Hd+9AnbYN2kh /S7DKJNSKy/iKPYXsNwOWHYG4UZbIV4eabttj2UJYShHA7arPZ2lpG5ubBUlQypM8r2p oWLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5330yd+eDrPoW40JszVRzVq+0eczCPxarEj3/b5z1izYMHXBuWN8 nhVeeWOcGrmhkiATljL9o7I1AJQk/OrL7Fs/bwu03M/6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvmMUniIT4cI0C7VuAMDJMTR3uDrp389rjrZt8VRC4c2e4wS81Snd7OgjPghGU2t2Zur6lLcS9QzvFeVOBizA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3cd:: with SMTP id c13mr18074336eja.25.1602317681139; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 01:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 01:14:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: <83h7r26037.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.218.45; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-f45.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/10 04:14:41 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:257307 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> But it is true that it would be preferable if the code matched the >> documentation. In the interest of consistency we are better off >> sticking to one spelling. Note that we already had around 40 other >> instances of "parsable" in our source tree. > > Since renaming symbols involves some pain, do we really need to be > 100% consistent here? I personally don't have a very strong opinion either way, FWIW.