Package: wiggle / 1.1-1

typos.patch Patch series | download
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
From: Carlos Maddela <e7appew@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:04:57 +1100
Subject: Fix some typos.

Description: Fix some typos.
Author: Carlos Maddela <e7appew@gmail.com>
Forwarded: https://github.com/neilbrown/wiggle/pull/10
Last-Update: 2019-01-24
---
This patch header follows DEP-3: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
---
 DOC/Algorithm    | 2 +-
 ReadMe.c         | 2 +-
 bestmatch.c      | 2 +-
 ccan/hash/hash.c | 6 +++---
 ccan/hash/hash.h | 4 ++--
 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/DOC/Algorithm b/DOC/Algorithm
index 515ba07..cb2ec48 100644
--- a/DOC/Algorithm
+++ b/DOC/Algorithm
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ side and build up the full path using linear space and only doubling
 your work.
 
 Wiggle takes a different approach.  Finding where the snakes cross
-seemed awkward to me, and having two blocks of similiar but not
+seemed awkward to me, and having two blocks of similar but not
 identical code (one to search forward, one to search backwards) didn't
 appeal at all.
 
diff --git a/ReadMe.c b/ReadMe.c
index e76a04b..c559a58 100644
--- a/ReadMe.c
+++ b/ReadMe.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ char HelpExtract[] = "\n"
 char HelpDiff[] = "\n"
 "wiggle --diff [-wl] [-p12] [-R]  file-or-patch [file-or-patch]\n"
 "\n"
-"The diff function will report the differencs and similarities between\n"
+"The diff function will report the differences and similarities between\n"
 "two files in a format similar to 'diff -u'.  With --word mode\n"
 "(the default) word-wise differences are displayed on lines starting\n"
 "with a '|'.  With --line mode, only whole lines are considered\n"
diff --git a/bestmatch.c b/bestmatch.c
index d1dcacf..eb35592 100644
--- a/bestmatch.c
+++ b/bestmatch.c
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ static void find_best(struct file *a, struct file *b,
  * in line-mode are interesting) and words that start with
  * and alphanumeric are interesting.  This excludes spaces and
  * special characters in word mode
- * Doing a best-fit comparision on only interesting words is
+ * Doing a best-fit comparison on only interesting words is
  * much faster than on all words, and is nearly as good
  */
 
diff --git a/ccan/hash/hash.c b/ccan/hash/hash.c
index 2659b92..cc58da6 100644
--- a/ccan/hash/hash.c
+++ b/ccan/hash/hash.c
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ if SELF_TEST is defined.  You can use this free for any purpose.  It's in
 the public domain.  It has no warranty.
 
 You probably want to use hashlittle().  hashlittle() and hashbig()
-hash byte arrays.  hashlittle() is is faster than hashbig() on
+hash byte arrays.  hashlittle() is faster than hashbig() on
 little-endian machines.  Intel and AMD are little-endian machines.
 On second thought, you probably want hashlittle2(), which is identical to
 hashlittle() except it returns two 32-bit hashes for the price of one.  
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static uint32_t hashlittle( const void *key, size_t length, uint32_t *val2 )
      * rest of the string.  Every machine with memory protection I've seen
      * does it on word boundaries, so is OK with this.  But VALGRIND will
      * still catch it and complain.  The masking trick does make the hash
-     * noticably faster for short strings (like English words).
+     * noticeably faster for short strings (like English words).
      *
      * Not on my testing with gcc 4.5 on an intel i5 CPU, at least --RR.
      */
@@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ static uint32_t hashbig( const void *key, size_t length, uint32_t *val2)
      * rest of the string.  Every machine with memory protection I've seen
      * does it on word boundaries, so is OK with this.  But VALGRIND will
      * still catch it and complain.  The masking trick does make the hash
-     * noticably faster for short strings (like English words).
+     * noticeably faster for short strings (like English words).
      *
      * Not on my testing with gcc 4.5 on an intel i5 CPU, at least --RR.
      */
diff --git a/ccan/hash/hash.h b/ccan/hash/hash.h
index 0400e6a..5bbef5d 100644
--- a/ccan/hash/hash.h
+++ b/ccan/hash/hash.h
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
  *	#include <stdio.h>
  *	#include <string.h>
  *
- *	// Simple demonstration: idential strings will have the same hash, but
+ *	// Simple demonstration: identical strings will have the same hash, but
  *	// two different strings will probably not.
  *	int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  *	{
@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ static inline uint32_t hash_string(const char *string)
  *	#include <stdio.h>
  *	#include <string.h>
  *
- *	// Simple demonstration: idential strings will have the same hash, but
+ *	// Simple demonstration: identical strings will have the same hash, but
  *	// two different strings will probably not.
  *	int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  *	{