mirror of
https://github.com/pezkuwichain/pezkuwi-subxt.git
synced 2026-04-28 17:57:56 +00:00
Fix spelling mistakes across the whole repository (#3808)
**Update:** Pushed additional changes based on the review comments. **This pull request fixes various spelling mistakes in this repository.** Most of the changes are contained in the first **3** commits: - `Fix spelling mistakes in comments and docs` - `Fix spelling mistakes in test names` - `Fix spelling mistakes in error messages, panic messages, logs and tracing` Other source code spelling mistakes are separated into individual commits for easier reviewing: - `Fix the spelling of 'authority'` - `Fix the spelling of 'REASONABLE_HEADERS_IN_JUSTIFICATION_ANCESTRY'` - `Fix the spelling of 'prev_enqueud_messages'` - `Fix the spelling of 'endpoint'` - `Fix the spelling of 'children'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSiblingSovereignAccount'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSudoAccount'` - `Fix the spelling of 'insufficient'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PalletXcmExtrinsicsBenchmark'` - `Fix the spelling of 'subtracted'` - `Fix the spelling of 'CandidatePendingAvailability'` - `Fix the spelling of 'exclusive'` - `Fix the spelling of 'until'` - `Fix the spelling of 'discriminator'` - `Fix the spelling of 'nonexistent'` - `Fix the spelling of 'subsystem'` - `Fix the spelling of 'indices'` - `Fix the spelling of 'committed'` - `Fix the spelling of 'topology'` - `Fix the spelling of 'response'` - `Fix the spelling of 'beneficiary'` - `Fix the spelling of 'formatted'` - `Fix the spelling of 'UNKNOWN_PROOF_REQUEST'` - `Fix the spelling of 'succeeded'` - `Fix the spelling of 'reopened'` - `Fix the spelling of 'proposer'` - `Fix the spelling of 'InstantiationNonce'` - `Fix the spelling of 'depositor'` - `Fix the spelling of 'expiration'` - `Fix the spelling of 'phantom'` - `Fix the spelling of 'AggregatedKeyValue'` - `Fix the spelling of 'randomness'` - `Fix the spelling of 'defendant'` - `Fix the spelling of 'AquaticMammal'` - `Fix the spelling of 'transactions'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PassingTracingSubscriber'` - `Fix the spelling of 'TxSignaturePayload'` - `Fix the spelling of 'versioning'` - `Fix the spelling of 'descendant'` - `Fix the spelling of 'overridden'` - `Fix the spelling of 'network'` Let me know if this structure is adequate. **Note:** The usage of the words `Merkle`, `Merkelize`, `Merklization`, `Merkelization`, `Merkleization`, is somewhat inconsistent but I left it as it is. ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Receival` is used to refer to message reception, IMO `Reception` is the correct word here, but I left it as it is.~~ ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Overlayed` is used instead of the more acceptable version `Overlaid` but I also left it as it is.~~ ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Applyable` is used instead of the correct version `Applicable` but I also left it as it is.~~ **Note:** Some usage of British vs American english e.g. `judgement` vs `judgment`, `initialise` vs `initialize`, `optimise` vs `optimize` etc. are both present in different places, but I suppose that's understandable given the number of contributors. ~~**Note:** There is a spelling mistake in `.github/CODEOWNERS` but it triggers errors in CI when I make changes to it, so I left it as it is.~~
This commit is contained in:
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ impl Default for BabeEpochConfiguration {
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Verifies the equivocation proof by making sure that: both headers have
|
||||
/// different hashes, are targetting the same slot, and have valid signatures by
|
||||
/// different hashes, are targeting the same slot, and have valid signatures by
|
||||
/// the same authority.
|
||||
pub fn check_equivocation_proof<H>(proof: EquivocationProof<H>) -> bool
|
||||
where
|
||||
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ where
|
||||
let first_pre_digest = find_pre_digest(&proof.first_header)?;
|
||||
let second_pre_digest = find_pre_digest(&proof.second_header)?;
|
||||
|
||||
// both headers must be targetting the same slot and it must
|
||||
// both headers must be targeting the same slot and it must
|
||||
// be the same as the one in the proof.
|
||||
if proof.slot != first_pre_digest.slot() ||
|
||||
first_pre_digest.slot() != second_pre_digest.slot()
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user