Re: master 95e8c7d 1/2: ; Fix typos

[Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>>     Stefan>  (defmacro semantic-parse-tree-unparseable-p ()
>>     Stefan> -  "Return non-nil if the current buffer has been marked unparseable."
>>     Stefan> +  "Return non-nil if the current buffer has been marked unparsable."
>>     Stefan>    '(eq semantic-parse-tree-state 'unparseable))
>>
>> The highly accurate method of googling both and comparing the counts
>> is not in favour of this change. The principle of making the
>> documentation and the code align is *definitely* not in favour of this
>> change.
>
> See also
>
>   https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/parsable

From that link:

    Both the spellings parsable and parseable are widely used with
    similar frequency; the spelling parsable (without the ‘e’) is
    preferred in formal usage, according to the rule:

    “Verbs drop silent final -e except after c and g (e.g. movable but
    changeable)”

    as mentioned in the OED, and used in World Wide Web Consortium
    standards.

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.

This is obviously extremely minor.  Personally I'd rather fix the names
of those two macros to match the docstring.  IIUC, an obsolete function
alias would do the job.