Patchwork [4/4] Grammar "it's" to "its".

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Adam Butcher
Date Aug. 1, 2013, 12:25 p.m.
Message ID <1375359930-12871-5-git-send-email-adam@jessamine.co.uk>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/264424/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Adam Butcher - Aug. 1, 2013, 12:25 p.m.
---
 gcc/cp/pt.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Gabriel Dos Reis - Aug. 3, 2013, 1:35 p.m.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Adam Butcher <adam@jessamine.co.uk> wrote:
> ---
>  gcc/cp/pt.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
> index a7baaba..99bc71b 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
> @@ -1986,7 +1986,7 @@ determine_specialization (tree template_id,
>           tree decl_arg_types;
>
>           /* This is an ordinary member function.  However, since
> -            we're here, we can assume it's enclosing class is a
> +            we're here, we can assume its enclosing class is a
>              template class.  For example,
>
>                template <typename T> struct S { void f(); };
> @@ -4337,7 +4337,7 @@ check_default_tmpl_args (tree decl, tree parms, bool is_primary,
>           || DECL_INITIALIZED_IN_CLASS_P (decl)))
>      /* We already checked these parameters when the template was
>         declared, so there's no need to do it again now.  This function
> -       was defined in class scope, but we're processing it's body now
> +       was defined in class scope, but we're processing its body now
>         that the class is complete.  */
>      return true;
>
> @@ -7482,7 +7482,7 @@ lookup_template_class_1 (tree d1, tree arglist, tree in_decl, tree context,
>         the one of #0.
>
>         When we encounter #1, we want to store the partial instantiation
> -       of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in it's CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
> +       of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in its CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
>
>         For all cases other than this "explicit specialization of member of a
>         class template", we just want to store the most general template into
> --
> 1.8.3
>

OK.
Do you have copyright assignment on file?

-- Gaby
Adam Butcher - Aug. 3, 2013, 1:54 p.m.
On 03.08.2013 14:35, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Adam Butcher <adam@jessamine.co.uk> 
> wrote:
>> ---
>>  gcc/cp/pt.c | 6 +++---
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
>> index a7baaba..99bc71b 100644
>> --- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
>> +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
>> @@ -1986,7 +1986,7 @@ determine_specialization (tree template_id,
>>           tree decl_arg_types;
>>
>>           /* This is an ordinary member function.  However, since
>> -            we're here, we can assume it's enclosing class is a
>> +            we're here, we can assume its enclosing class is a
>>              template class.  For example,
>>
>>                template <typename T> struct S { void f(); };
>> @@ -4337,7 +4337,7 @@ check_default_tmpl_args (tree decl, tree 
>> parms, bool is_primary,
>>           || DECL_INITIALIZED_IN_CLASS_P (decl)))
>>      /* We already checked these parameters when the template was
>>         declared, so there's no need to do it again now.  This 
>> function
>> -       was defined in class scope, but we're processing it's body 
>> now
>> +       was defined in class scope, but we're processing its body 
>> now
>>         that the class is complete.  */
>>      return true;
>>
>> @@ -7482,7 +7482,7 @@ lookup_template_class_1 (tree d1, tree 
>> arglist, tree in_decl, tree context,
>>         the one of #0.
>>
>>         When we encounter #1, we want to store the partial 
>> instantiation
>> -       of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in it's 
>> CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
>> +       of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in its 
>> CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
>>
>>         For all cases other than this "explicit specialization of 
>> member of a
>>         class template", we just want to store the most general 
>> template into
>> --
>> 1.8.3
>>
>
> OK.
> Do you have copyright assignment on file?
>
Yes.  I only came across these as I was addressing one of Jason's 
comments for my own bad grammar!

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
index a7baaba..99bc71b 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -1986,7 +1986,7 @@  determine_specialization (tree template_id,
 	  tree decl_arg_types;
 
 	  /* This is an ordinary member function.  However, since
-	     we're here, we can assume it's enclosing class is a
+	     we're here, we can assume its enclosing class is a
 	     template class.  For example,
 
 	       template <typename T> struct S { void f(); };
@@ -4337,7 +4337,7 @@  check_default_tmpl_args (tree decl, tree parms, bool is_primary,
 	  || DECL_INITIALIZED_IN_CLASS_P (decl)))
     /* We already checked these parameters when the template was
        declared, so there's no need to do it again now.  This function
-       was defined in class scope, but we're processing it's body now
+       was defined in class scope, but we're processing its body now
        that the class is complete.  */
     return true;
 
@@ -7482,7 +7482,7 @@  lookup_template_class_1 (tree d1, tree arglist, tree in_decl, tree context,
 	the one of #0.
 
 	When we encounter #1, we want to store the partial instantiation
-	of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in it's CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
+	of M (template<class T> S<int>::M<T>) in its CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE.
 
 	For all cases other than this "explicit specialization of member of a
 	class template", we just want to store the most general template into