Hi, On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 04:43:00AM +0200, Veres Lajos wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Veres Lajos wrote: > > > Around 99% of the typos are in comments and documentations a few of them > > are only in function/variable names (living code). > > I think it is not really history obtrusive. > > > > I will create a small subset for preview and send it for reviewing. > > (I would not do the whole before getting a green signal... It could take > > me at least 4-5 hours to review the whole patch...) > > http://lavela.hu/gcc.misspell-fixer.20130704.notrevised.patch.bz2 > This is the patch generated by the misspell fixer script. > (This is the patch against the whole tree.) > I did NOT reviewed it yet. > What do you think could it be usefull? Should I review the file? > Probably I could remove some false positives, but I am not a C expert.
I'd just ignore all ChangeLog files, nobody will want to spend time reviewing changes in them. It may be even a bad idea. I think your patch also includes a lot of other file types (e.g. *.po) which I'm not sure you want to touch. So I'd suggest that for your first proposal you pick fixes in a dozen or so .c and/or .h files, prepare a patch modifying just these files, check the changes manually, submit the patch and see what happens :-) I cannot approve anything but I certainly appreciate your effort. And I think that fixing typos in the documentation files will definitely be appreciated by everyone. Thanks, Martin
