https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85665
--- Comment #13 from Chung-Ju Wu <jasonwucj at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > > (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #3) > > > Therefore I thought I'd try a different approach this time. > > > > Understandable. Thank you for persisting with trying to fix these kind of > > issues. > > > > You're likely to have more success if you simply send a patch with fixes to > > gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org, CCing the diagnostics maintainers. They can then > > review your suggested fixes and commit the whole patch to fix everything at > > once. Even better would be to get write access to SVN and fix them yourself > > (getting approval for anything that isn't an "obvious fix" as per > > https://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html#policies under "Free for all"). > > > > Having the "obvious fix" rule spelled out in a bit more detail would > probably be helpful, as a lot of time I feel like I'd have to ask whether > something would count as an "obvious fix" or not, which would end up being > pretty much the same thing as getting approval... I have to admit that there still have some grammatical and language-level typos in nds32 target. I am really sorry for that. For a non-native speaker like me, it takes more time to nitpick ALL the typos in the sentences. I am thinking of closing this bug issue for now. But it is ALWAYS WELCOME to contribute patches as "obvious fix" if you notice any other typos in the nds32 source. I will also have further discussion with contributor if the patches do not fit my original words meaning. Looking forward to seeing more patches. Thanks! :)
