Re: Possible spelling fixes

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yes, some of that was committed, and some comments were offered. If
> there is more to do, please send a rebased patch set.

Conflicting comments were offered. And Heikki requested I send along
the remainder. Which I did. Only one of those patches would have been
impacted by the conflicting comments.

The patches in this thread still applied today:
spelling: comments -- conflicting comments about NUL/NULL
spelling: strings -- no comments / applied cleanly
spelling: variables -- no comments / applied cleanly
spelling: misc -- no comments / applied cleanly
spelling: api -- no comments until today / applied cleanly, may end up
being dropped

I want to thank Heikki for the initial acceptance and Alvaro and David
for their additional comments.

I'm not going to send a new submission before tonight.

If anyone else wants to make comments before I resubmit, I welcome them...

For reference, my current work queue is here:
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/compare/master...jsoref:spelling-words?expand=1

The rebased version of the patches that were submitted but ignored are here:
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/compare/master...jsoref:spelling?expand=1
I haven't updated them to reflect my work queue, as selecting things
into those bundles is a not particularly pleasant, and thus a step I
want to do as few times as possible.

One thing that would be helpful is if someone could comment on:
https://github.com/jsoref/postgres/commit/9050882d601134ea1ba26f77ce5f1aaed75418de
-#undef SH_ITERTOR
+#undef SH_ITERATOR

It's unclear to me what that line is/was doing. It's possible that it
could be removed entirely instead of having its spelling changed.
If the line is trying to guard against a previous version of the code,
which is no longer active, then it deserves a comment.