Spelling #119
Spelling #119
Conversation
extern/linenoise.hpp
Outdated
| * | ||
| * All credits and commendations have to go to the authors of the | ||
| * following excellent libraries. | ||
| * | ||
| * - linenoise.h and linenose.c (https://github.com/antirez/linenoise) | ||
| * - linenoise.h and linenoise.c (https://github.com/antirez/linenoise) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is missing the comment which we forgot to add - this is cpp-linenoise, https://github.com/yhirose/cpp-linenoise. Please submit these fixes to upstream and remove them from this for now, we'd be happy to take the new upstream version as our version isn't modified iirc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Submitted as yhirose/cpp-linenoise#31
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fwiw, both upstream PRs have merged. This has to be one of the most responsive ecosystems I've seen in recent memory.
extern/linenoise.hpp
Outdated
| @@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ inline void SendSequence(LPCWSTR seq) | |||
| inline void InterpretEscSeq(void) | |||
| { | |||
| int i; | |||
| WORD attribut; | |||
| WORD attribute; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sometimes projects intentionally misspell reserved words -- afaict this isn't one of those cases.
(I've left a displaName alone because it was such a typo, although I personally would prefer displayName_ which I expect would have the same effect.)
| @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ end | |||
|
|
|||
| These rules are simple to implement. In any Lua parser there is already a point where you have to disambiguate an identifier that starts an assignment statement (`foo = 5`) from an identifier that starts a function call (`foo(5)`). It's one of the few, if not the only, place in the Lua grammar where single token lookahead is not sufficient to parse Lua, because you could have `foo.bar(5)` or `foo.bar=5` or `foo.bar(5)[6] = 7`. | |||
|
|
|||
| Because of this, we need to parse the entire left hand side of an assignment statement (primaryexpr in Lua's BNF) and then check if it was a function call; if not, we'd expect it to be an assignment statement. | |||
| Because of this, we need to parse the entire left hand side of an assignment statement (primaryexp in Lua's BNF) and then check if it was a function call; if not, we'd expect it to be an assignment statement. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I searched and am fairly certain this is a vaguely significant typo as it stands alone in this repository and also appears to differ from the Lua BNF that I could find.
| @@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ TEST_CASE_FIXTURE(Fixture, "table_insert_correctly_infers_type_of_array_2_args_o | |||
| CHECK_EQ(typeChecker.stringType, requireType("s")); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| TEST_CASE_FIXTURE(Fixture, "table_insert_corrrectly_infers_type_of_array_3_args_overload") | |||
| TEST_CASE_FIXTURE(Fixture, "table_insert_correctly_infers_type_of_array_3_args_overload") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm happy to ignore tests if that's a preference, afaict fixing this is harmless (I've actively ignored things like error'string of words' -- which annoys most spell checkers -- in tests here, although I believe adding a space wouldn't hurt the tests and would make them more readable).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixing test case names is fine, FWIW for now we're using the convention of C identifiers for test names - we've used to use boost.test and migrated to doctest earlier this year, so just in case we need to migrate again to a framework that doesn't support string literals as test names we're sticking with identifiers for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The other thing is stuff like this: https://github.com/Roblox/luau/blob/586bef6a4cffec80f7f2c7d4ed397aacc8fa9313/tests/conformance/gc.lua#L126
The spell checker I'm using would be much happier with:
-for n in pairs(a) do error'cannot be here' end
+for n in pairs(a) do error 'cannot be here' endThere was a problem hiding this comment.
That would be fine to change as well I think, syntactically they are the same and stylistically having a space seems better. Alternatively error("cannot be here") is cleaner and more idiomatic :)
|
I legitimately cannot tell the difference between automated / manual comments here. This is literally perfect, I had no idea this existed. |
|
you mad man |
|
sanboxing |
|
Thanks! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This PR corrects misspellings identified by the check-spelling action.
The misspellings have been reported at jsoref@9d44960#commitcomment-59407961
The action reports that the changes in this PR would make it happy: jsoref@44b0dee
Note: this PR does not include the action. If you're interested in running a spell check on every PR and push, that can be offered separately.