Fix for grammatical error in code-comment

Started by Emil Igglandover 9 years ago2 messageshackers
Beta feature

Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.

won't retrysuccessCI history

You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:

docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t36305
psql -h localhost -U postgres

Built from patchset v1 (message #1), July 28, 2026 at 07:45 AM.

Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:

git clone --branch t36305_1 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

In a checkout you already have, add the fork once:

git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

then, for this patchset and every later one:

git fetch hackorum t36305_1 && git checkout t36305_1

Patchset v1 (message #1) is on t36305_1

Jump to latest
#1Emil Iggland
emil@iggland.com

I found a grammatical error in one of the code comments.

The comment is made regarding the run-time of the algorithm, and
references big-O performance.
However the comment text uses "effective", instead of the probably more
correct "efficient".

The original comment reads as though the code would not do its job
correctly, rather than just not very quickly.

Regards
Emil

Attachments:

t36305_1
grammar_fix.patchtext/plain; charset=UTF-8; name=grammar_fix.patchDownload+1-1
#2Magnus Hagander
magnus@hagander.net
In reply to: Emil Iggland (#1)
Re: Fix for grammatical error in code-comment

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Emil Iggland <emil@iggland.com> wrote:

I found a grammatical error in one of the code comments.

The comment is made regarding the run-time of the algorithm, and
references big-O performance.
However the comment text uses "effective", instead of the probably more
correct "efficient".

The original comment reads as though the code would not do its job
correctly, rather than just not very quickly.

Applied, thanks.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/