[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR: 8285366: Fix typos in serviceability
From:       David Holmes <dholmes () openjdk ! java ! net>
Date:       2022-04-23 6:12:29
Message-ID: i8HhcmdDFktsEGg93rAGBehfsoKxWAXjZpF1Rj-pVc8=.782315bc-a31a-4367-9435-1f1c14793b94 () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:08:05 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw@openjdk.org> wrote:

> > But on the other hand we have `javax.script.Invocable`. :-) 
> > 
> > Codespell suggested this change, and I based my decision to keep it based on \
> > [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invocable) not even \
> > listing "invokable" as an alternate spelling, and that "invocable" has about 3x \
> > the number of Google hits than "invokable".  
> > But sure, there is perhaps reason to consider "invokable" an acceptable \
> > alternative and keep it. I guess it depends on if you consider the word to be \
> > based on "invoke" with a suffix, or a latinized form, like "invocation".  
> > I'll wait a while for others to chime in, otherwise I'll revert the "invokable" \
> > changes.
> 
> Sure, I just thought there was enough evidence that invokable is not definitely \
> wrong, even if invocable is more correct and popular, so it's not obvious it should \
> be changed.  Don't lose sleep over it. 8-) 
> More importantly, on the tests -- I saw the changes in exception messages, searched \
> for the wrong text in the test directories, and didn't find any matches that looked \
> like checks.

Invocable, Invokable and Invokeable are all used in practice. We have a mix of \
invocable and invokable throughout our codebase, with more of the former than the \
latter - and in prose "invocable" is probably best.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8334


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]