On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 07:40:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <i...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I ran `codespell` on hotspot, and accepted those changes where it indeed > discovered real typos. > > You'd be surprised over the many implementions of instrinsics and other > intructions accross all archtectures I've encounted, so for the preceding > reason it's neccesery to sucessfully seach for exisiting typos... Thank you for all your input! I will update the PR according to all suggestions. But let me answer a few more general comments first. The spelling corrections in this PR was generated by codespell. I manually removed all false positives (that was the most tedious part of this fix). Codespell works by checking a list of commonly misspelled words, not by verifying that all words are present in a list of accepted spellings. The latter approach might work for normal prose, but is utterly worthless for source code. In practice, codespell does automatically what several users have been doing manually lately -- discover a common misspelling, searching the code base for more instances of that misspelling. So, there are certainly lots of typos left. But this should reasonably cut down on the number of PRs of the type "Fix typos for supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" that updates a lot of files for just a single misspelled word. For some cases where I were not sure (like mismatch or re-enable), I googled, read spelling recommendations and/or checked how common alternative spellings where. When the ratio exceeded 10:1 or so, I deemed one alternative as "correct"; in less common cases I let the original authors choice of spelling remain. I have not read the complete sentences, just verified that the actual word fixes seemed to make sense. Hence the odd results in some places. Ideally, I would like to find some way of keeping the code "codespell clean" using tooling. Due to the amount of false positives, this is not a trivial task. I don't think we'll ever be able to have it as part of jcheck, but we might have a script that someone runs once per release or so. I'm not yet sure how to achieve this, but my two main ideas is to either just run codespell on added or modified code (think "+" lines in git diff), or to have a list of acknowledged false positives that should be skipped. Before I can even start on this, the huge number of *true* positives needs to be addressed, though! Hotspot is by no means worst, it's just a huge chunk of code which I addressed all at once. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8260
