IRC logs for #openttd.dev on OFTC at 2012-12-17
⏴ go to previous day
08:32:41 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
14:37:43 *** ntoskrnl has joined #openttd.dev
15:10:47 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
16:14:09 *** LordAro has joined #openttd.dev
16:14:09 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v LordAro
16:52:16 *** LordAro is now known as Guest1749
16:52:16 *** LordAro has joined #openttd.dev
16:52:16 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v LordAro
18:06:25 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
18:16:55 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
18:28:42 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd.dev
18:28:42 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v frosch123
19:57:51 *** Alberth has joined #openttd.dev
19:57:51 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Alberth
20:00:52 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
20:06:42 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
20:21:16 *** Eagle_Rainbow has joined #openttd.dev
20:21:16 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Eagle_Rainbow
20:21:42 <Eagle_Rainbow> Alberth: Do you still collect typos?
20:22:11 <Alberth> once in a while I do, yes
20:22:34 <Eagle_Rainbow> so, you currently don't?
20:23:15 <Eagle_Rainbow> Well, I went over the source code with a spell checker - and what should I say: it was quite fertile...
20:23:45 <Eagle_Rainbow> should I send you those diffs or should I go via flyspray?
20:24:14 <Alberth> just add it to flyspray, imho
20:24:44 <Alberth> doc fixes doesn't have high priority :p
20:25:29 <Eagle_Rainbow> I also wouldn't assume that; but not fixing them also isn't an option...
20:26:31 <Alberth> I don't actively look for them, that helps too :p
20:26:58 <Alberth> but yeah, once you found them, you might as well record and fix them
20:28:10 <Eagle_Rainbow> that was the idea... and as the spell checker found them easily... ;)
20:28:26 <Eagle_Rainbow> but sometimes it was hard to guess what was meant :p
20:29:30 <michi_cc> Eagle_Rainbow: I hope you used british english and not american :p
20:29:31 <Alberth> the spellchecker doesn't understand Openttd-es, so I assume you got a lot of false positives
20:29:59 <Eagle_Rainbow> Michi_cc: no, although I prefer AE, I tried to make it as BE as I could :)
20:30:09 <Eagle_Rainbow> even switched the spell checker to BE - just for you ;)
20:30:36 <Eagle_Rainbow> Alberth: yes, the false-positive rate was very high --- at the beginning... A user-dict helped a lot in the long run
20:31:16 <Eagle_Rainbow> Just one thing which I was a bit cautious on:
20:31:22 <Eagle_Rainbow> I did not change those "initialization"...
20:31:28 <Alberth> can you also add them all together in an archive (tar or zip), that's easier to download
20:31:46 <Eagle_Rainbow> BE would be (AFAIK) Initialisation, whilst AE is initialization
20:31:55 <Eagle_Rainbow> we have that a thousand times...
20:32:07 <Eagle_Rainbow> Alberth: will do, gimme a sec
20:33:14 <Alberth> np, I am not going to check them tonight
20:33:17 <michi_cc> AE is definitely the more common code dialect, and our source code surely contains lots of Americanisms, but we theoretically write BE.
20:34:07 * Alberth thought we wrote C++ :p
20:37:01 <Eagle_Rainbow> well, my eclipse-based spell checker was very picky and only wanted to allow initialise...
20:38:17 <michi_cc> I think -ise is the original british spelling, but as all languages it is changing and -ize is now probably just as common.
20:38:43 <Eagle_Rainbow> ok, then it was a good idea anyway to keep it that way
20:39:02 <Eagle_Rainbow> BTW: those patches - in sum - provide changes on 525 lines...
20:39:28 <Eagle_Rainbow> That's why I tried to cut them into smaller chunks - otherwise the commit would become quite large...
20:40:50 <michi_cc> Interesting, apparently -ize is Oxford history while -ise is Cambridge history. Seems they compete in more than just rowing :)
20:42:11 <Eagle_Rainbow> seems so - and we now can argue, if we want to follow O-AE or C-BE :P
20:42:29 <michi_cc> Also, -ise is used in UK mass media while scientific and and technical writing is more -ize.
20:43:27 <Eagle_Rainbow> Most likely science is affected more by the AE style
20:45:51 <Alberth> size ofa commit is not so relevant, it is the number of conceptual changes that's important (it should be 1).
20:46:37 <Eagle_Rainbow> well, then my patches don't fit to that rule at all - I hope, the count is zero in this case =:)
20:47:01 <Alberth> fix spell-check errors is not a conceptual change? :)
20:47:29 <Eagle_Rainbow> a very "basic" change, though :)
20:48:06 <Alberth> sure, but like Codechange, you do make a change, even if the functionality stays the same :)
20:51:03 <Eagle_Rainbow> well, but -- typically -- a code change provides a change of the program behaviour (functional-wise or usability or quality or ...); I expect that those typo fixes don't change anything that an end user could experience (except: changes on documentation which are made public for 3rd-party dev)
20:52:28 <Eagle_Rainbow> someone will have a look later - and then some time later I hope this will go to trunk...
20:53:28 *** Zuu has joined #openttd.dev
21:01:06 * Eagle_Rainbow didn't knew this convention
21:01:27 <Eagle_Rainbow> I am no comitter, so I didn't read that wiki page yet ...
21:04:24 <Eagle_Rainbow> What do you use as "commit type" if you cleaned up a file which was there by error ? "Fix,Remove,Cleanup" ;)
21:05:51 <Alberth> but it never happened to me so far, and maybe never yet; patches get reviewed so often, we catch those errors earlier :)
21:08:34 <frosch123> i think we had several -Revert: part of bla
21:41:34 *** Alberth has left #openttd.dev
22:00:06 *** LordAro has joined #openttd.dev
22:00:06 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v LordAro
continue to next day ⏵