Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] repo: add filtering options to "repo structure"

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

"Mark C. Chu-Carroll" <markchucarroll@fastmail.com> writes:

> diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
> index ee1df92d1d..79d44b58b5 100644
> --- a/revision.c
> +++ b/revision.c
> @@ -2837,7 +2837,7 @@ static int handle_revision_pseudo_opt(struct rev_info *revs,
>  	 * NOTE!
>  	 *
>  	 * Commands like "git shortlog" will not accept the options below
> -	 * unless parse_revision_opt queues them (as opposed to erroring
> +	 * unless parse_revision_op	t queues them (as opposed to erroring
>  	 * out).
>  	 *
>  	 * When implementing your new pseudo-option, remember to

What is this change about?

> diff --git a/revision.h b/revision.h
> index e5dabd18ce..63135c5f88 100644
> --- a/revision.h
> +++ b/revision.h
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct topo_walk_info;
>  
>  struct rev_info {
>  	/*
> -	 * Work queue of commits, stored as either a linked list or a
> +~	 * Work queue of commits, stored as either a linked list or a
>  	 * priority queue, but never both at the same time.
>  	 * rev_info_commit_list_to_queue() converts list to queue.
>  	 */

Ditto.

Everybody makes mistakes during their editing, and occasionally fat
thumb hits unintended keys while the cursor is in an area one is not
editing at all.  Mistakes happen and that is perfectly OK.

But a hunk like this one in a submitted patch is a clear sign that
even the author is not reading what they are sending out.  And this
patch, among its 16 hunks, two are such hunks that was never
proofread.

Quite honestly, it is beyond me how anybody would expect others to
seriously take their time to review such a patch.

Grumble.