Re: [PATCH 3/4] Fix misuses of "nor" in comments

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 21, 2014, 17:52 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq4n2rv3qw.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMuNMfov+Z0Hx_a-hZ2ZGRdkTtw1eqUn01gWEQ+caT3VcHZkVQ@mail.gmail.com>

Justin Lebar <jlebar@google.com> writes:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Thanks for the quick reply.
>
> When I send a new patch, should I fold these changes into the original
> commit, or should I send them as a separate commit?
>
>>> diff --git a/builtin/apply.c b/builtin/apply.c
>>> index b0d0986..6013e19 100644
>>> --- a/builtin/apply.c
>>> +++ b/builtin/apply.c
>>> @@ -4061,7 +4061,7 @@ static int write_out_one_reject(struct patch *patch)
>>>                 return error(_("cannot open %s: %s"), namebuf, strerror(errno));
>>>
>>>         /* Normal git tools never deal with .rej, so do not pretend
>>> -        * this is a git patch by saying --git nor give extended
>>> +        * this is a git patch by saying --git or giving extended
>>>          * headers.  While at it, maybe please "kompare" that wants
>>>          * the trailing TAB and some garbage at the end of line ;-).
>>>          */
>>
>> I don't think the change from "give" to "giving" here is grammatically correct.
>
> Is it?  I might be misunderstanding the sentence, then.  I parse the
> new sentence as...

The new sentence should say what the original wanted to say, which I think was:

    - Do not pretend this is a git patch by saying --git
    - Do not show extended headers.

I however think that extended headers is one attribute of a patch being a "git patch", so I would say that the break down of your new version:

>   Do not pretend this is a git patch by
>   - saying --git, or
>   - giving extended headers.

makes sense.