Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Docs: Fix typos #9751

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Dec 23, 2017
Merged

Docs: Fix typos #9751

merged 2 commits into from Dec 23, 2017

Conversation

j-f1
Copy link
Contributor

@j-f1 j-f1 commented Dec 21, 2017

What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to item)

[x] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix (template)
[ ] New rule (template)
[ ] Changes an existing rule (template)
[ ] Add autofixing to a rule
[ ] Add a CLI option
[ ] Add something to the core
[ ] Other, please explain:

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

I fixed a few typos and adjusted capitalization.

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

Nothing in particular.

Copy link
Member

@platinumazure platinumazure left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Left some comments, but nothing that would lead me to block this.

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# Require Camelcase (camelcase)
# Require CamelCase (camelcase)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the canonical spelling of camelcase is camelCase.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should I change it back to Camelcase or should I use Camel-case or something else?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the word is "camelcase" (or "Camelcase" when title-cased).

I don't feel as strongly about this one as I do the RegExps change. Feel free to wait for a second opinion on this one if you like.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@j-f1 j-f1 Dec 22, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wikipedia’s article is named Camel case, but it says:

stylized as camelCase or CamelCase

Google’s definition says:

noun: camelCase

DuckDuckGo says:

Camelcase does not appear to be spelled correctly.
Suggestions: camel case, camel-case, camels, camellias, Camel's, camel's.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, I'll be. Okay, I'll defer to other reviewers' consensus here.


When it comes to naming variables, style guides generally fall into one of two camps: camelcase (`variableName`) and underscores (`variable_name`). This rule focuses on using the camelcase approach. If your style guide calls for camelcasing your variable names, then this rule is for you!
When it comes to naming variables, style guides generally fall into one of two camps: camelcase (`variableName`) and underscores (`variable_name`). This rule focuses on using the camelcase approach. If your style guide calls for camelCasing your variable names, then this rule is for you!
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the canonical spelling of camelcase is camelCase.

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
# Disallow Regexs That Look Like Division (no-div-regex)
# Disallow RegExps That Look Like Division (no-div-regex)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To avoid contention around regexes vs regexen vs RegExps, should this just say "Regular Expressions"? There's no strong need to abbreviate here anyway.

@platinumazure platinumazure added accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion documentation Relates to ESLint's documentation labels Dec 21, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion archived due to age This issue has been archived; please open a new issue for any further discussion documentation Relates to ESLint's documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants