How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Chuck Ebbert]

[me@qq linux-2.5.68-ref]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
     65



  Avast there ye swabs, prepare to fire a broadside!



------
 Chuck

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Steven Cole]

On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 07:33, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> [me@qq linux-2.5.68-ref]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
>      65
> 
> 
> 
>   Avast there ye swabs, prepare to fire a broadside!

Almost all of the spelling fixes from the Spelling Police were in
comments, not code.  This mistaken spelling of canonicalize is mostly in
various parts of the non-comment code. 

[steven@spc5 linux]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
     64
[steven@spc5 linux]$ fix.canon
[steven@spc5 linux]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
      0

The fix.canon script used was this:

#!/bin/sh
find . -name "*" | xargs grep -l cannonicalize | awk '{print "ex - ",$1," -c \"%s/cannonicalize/canonicalize/g|x\""}' | sh

Yes, I know that you can do that in fewer characters with perl.
But that script should have fixed canonicalize everywhere.  BTW, I did
it on a tree made with bk export -tplain ../linux.  The repository had
been recently updated with bk pull.

I prepared a patch in case anyone cares enough about this.  I tested on
i386 by building and booting.  It works for me.  

Steven

 arch/mips/au1000/common/serial.c     |    4 ++--
 arch/parisc/kernel/irq.c             |   12 ++++++------
 arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/oak_setup.c   |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/platforms/adir_setup.c      |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/platforms/chrp_setup.c      |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/ev64260_setup.c   |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/platforms/gemini_setup.c    |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/platforms/lopec_setup.c     |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/mcpn765_setup.c   |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/pmac_setup.c      |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/platforms/pplus_setup.c     |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c      |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/sandpoint_setup.c |    4 ++--
 arch/ppc/platforms/zx4500_setup.c    |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/syslib/m8260_setup.c        |    2 +-
 arch/ppc/syslib/m8xx_setup.c         |    2 +-
 drivers/char/synclink.c              |    2 +-
 drivers/net/ac3200.c                 |    2 +-
 drivers/serial/8250.c                |    2 +-
 drivers/serial/core.c                |    2 +-
 include/asm-alpha/irq.h              |    2 +-
 include/asm-arm/arch-arc/irqs.h      |    2 +-
 include/asm-arm/arch-ebsa285/irqs.h  |    2 +-
 include/asm-arm/arch-nexuspci/irqs.h |    2 +-
 include/asm-arm/arch-tbox/irqs.h     |    2 +-
 include/asm-arm/irq.h                |    4 ++--
 include/asm-h8300/irq.h              |    2 +-
 include/asm-i386/irq.h               |    2 +-
 include/asm-ia64/irq.h               |    4 ++--
 include/asm-m68k/irq.h               |    2 +-
 include/asm-mips/irq.h               |    4 ++--
 include/asm-mips64/irq.h             |    4 ++--
 include/asm-parisc/irq.h             |    2 +-
 include/asm-ppc/irq.h                |   12 ++++++------
 include/asm-ppc/machdep.h            |    2 +-
 include/asm-ppc64/irq.h              |    2 +-
 include/asm-sh/serial-bigsur.h       |    2 +-
 include/asm-sh/serial-ec3104.h       |    2 +-
 include/asm-sh/serial.h              |    2 +-
 include/asm-sparc/irq.h              |    2 +-
 include/asm-sparc64/irq.h            |    2 +-
 include/asm-v850/irq.h               |    2 +-
 include/asm-x86_64/irq.h             |    2 +-
 43 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)

diff -ur bk-current/arch/mips/au1000/common/serial.c linux/arch/mips/au1000/common/serial.c
--- bk-current/arch/mips/au1000/common/serial.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:03 2003
+++ linux/arch/mips/au1000/common/serial.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@
 		goto check_and_exit;
 	}
 
-	new_serial.irq = irq_cannonicalize(new_serial.irq);
+	new_serial.irq = irq_canonicalize(new_serial.irq);
 
 	if ((new_serial.irq >= NR_IRQS) || (new_serial.irq < 0) || 
 	    (new_serial.baud_base < 9600)|| (new_serial.type < PORT_UNKNOWN) ||
@@ -2662,7 +2662,7 @@
 		state->icount.rx = state->icount.tx = 0;
 		state->icount.frame = state->icount.parity = 0;
 		state->icount.overrun = state->icount.brk = 0;
-		state->irq = irq_cannonicalize(state->irq);
+		state->irq = irq_canonicalize(state->irq);
 		if (state->hub6)
 			state->io_type = SERIAL_IO_HUB6;
 		if (state->port && check_region(state->port,8)) {
diff -ur bk-current/arch/parisc/kernel/irq.c linux/arch/parisc/kernel/irq.c
--- bk-current/arch/parisc/kernel/irq.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:17 2003
+++ linux/arch/parisc/kernel/irq.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@
 
 	DBG_IRQ(irq, ("mask_irq(%d) %d+%d eiem 0x%lx\n", irq,
 				IRQ_REGION(irq), IRQ_OFFSET(irq), cpu_eiem));
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	region = irq_region[IRQ_REGION(irq)];
 	if (region->ops.mask_irq)
 		region->ops.mask_irq(region->data.dev, IRQ_OFFSET(irq));
@@ -173,7 +173,7 @@
 
 	DBG_IRQ(irq, ("unmask_irq(%d) %d+%d eiem 0x%lx\n", irq,
 				IRQ_REGION(irq), IRQ_OFFSET(irq), cpu_eiem));
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	region = irq_region[IRQ_REGION(irq)];
 	if (region->ops.unmask_irq)
 		region->ops.unmask_irq(region->data.dev, IRQ_OFFSET(irq));
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@
 
 	DBG_IRQ(irq, ("disable_irq(%d) %d+%d eiem 0x%lx\n", irq,
 				IRQ_REGION(irq), IRQ_OFFSET(irq), cpu_eiem));
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	region = irq_region[IRQ_REGION(irq)];
 	if (region->ops.disable_irq)
 		region->ops.disable_irq(region->data.dev, IRQ_OFFSET(irq));
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@
 
 	DBG_IRQ(irq, ("enable_irq(%d) %d+%d eiem 0x%lx\n", irq,
 				IRQ_REGION(irq), IRQ_OFFSET(irq), cpu_eiem));
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	region = irq_region[IRQ_REGION(irq)];
 
 	if (region->ops.enable_irq)
@@ -594,7 +594,7 @@
 	printk(KERN_INFO "request_irq(%d, %p, 0x%lx, %s, %p)\n",irq, handler, irqflags, devname, dev_id);
 #endif
 
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	/* request_irq()/free_irq() may not be called from interrupt context. */
 	if (in_interrupt())
 		BUG();
@@ -654,7 +654,7 @@
 	struct irqaction *action, **p;
 
 	/* See comments in request_irq() about interrupt context */
-	irq = irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	irq = irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	
 	if (in_interrupt()) BUG();
 
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/oak_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/oak_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/oak_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:45:07 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/oak_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch	 	= oak_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo	 	= oak_show_percpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize 	= NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize 	= NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ		 	= oak_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq		 	= oak_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init		 	= NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/adir_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/adir_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/adir_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:07 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/adir_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = adir_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = adir_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = adir_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = adir_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/chrp_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/chrp_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/chrp_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:45:10 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/chrp_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@
 }
 
 u_int __chrp
-chrp_irq_cannonicalize(u_int irq)
+chrp_irq_canonicalize(u_int irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 		return 9;
@@ -456,7 +456,7 @@
 	ppc_md.setup_arch     = chrp_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo = of_show_percpuinfo;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo   = chrp_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = chrp_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = chrp_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ       = chrp_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq        = openpic_get_irq;
 
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/ev64260_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/ev64260_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/ev64260_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:43:57 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/ev64260_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -437,7 +437,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = ev64260_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = ev64260_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = ev64260_init_irq;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = gt64260_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/gemini_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/gemini_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/gemini_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:31 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/gemini_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -559,7 +559,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = gemini_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = gemini_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = gemini_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = openpic_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/lopec_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/lopec_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/lopec_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:37 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/lopec_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
 }
 
 static u32
-lopec_irq_cannonicalize(u32 irq)
+lopec_irq_canonicalize(u32 irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 		return 9;
@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = lopec_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = lopec_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = lopec_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = lopec_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = lopec_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = openpic_get_irq;
 
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/mcpn765_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/mcpn765_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/mcpn765_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:56 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/mcpn765_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@
 }
 
 static u32
-mcpn765_irq_cannonicalize(u32 irq)
+mcpn765_irq_canonicalize(u32 irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 		return 9;
@@ -434,7 +434,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = mcpn765_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = mcpn765_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = mcpn765_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = mcpn765_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = mcpn765_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = openpic_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = mcpn765_init2;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/pmac_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/pmac_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/pmac_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:54 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/pmac_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -619,7 +619,7 @@
 	ppc_md.setup_arch     = pmac_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo   = pmac_show_cpuinfo;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo = pmac_show_percpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ       = pmac_pic_init;
 	ppc_md.get_irq        = pmac_get_irq; /* Changed later on ... */
 	
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/pplus_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/pplus_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/pplus_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:45:29 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/pplus_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@
 }
 
 static unsigned int
-pplus_irq_cannonicalize(u_int irq)
+pplus_irq_canonicalize(u_int irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 	{
@@ -469,7 +469,7 @@
 	ppc_md.setup_arch     = pplus_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo = NULL;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo    = pplus_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = pplus_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = pplus_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ       = pplus_init_IRQ;
 	/* this gets changed later on if we have an OpenPIC -- Cort */
 	ppc_md.get_irq        = i8259_irq;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:45:14 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -976,7 +976,7 @@
 }
 
 static unsigned int __prep
-prep_irq_cannonicalize(u_int irq)
+prep_irq_canonicalize(u_int irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 	{
@@ -1150,7 +1150,7 @@
 	ppc_md.setup_arch     = prep_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo = prep_show_percpuinfo;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo   = NULL; /* set in prep_setup_arch() */
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = prep_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = prep_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ       = prep_init_IRQ;
 	/* this gets changed later on if we have an OpenPIC -- Cort */
 	ppc_md.get_irq        = i8259_irq;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/sandpoint_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/sandpoint_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/sandpoint_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:45:38 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/sandpoint_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -349,7 +349,7 @@
 }
 
 static u32
-sandpoint_irq_cannonicalize(u32 irq)
+sandpoint_irq_canonicalize(u32 irq)
 {
 	if (irq == 2)
 	{
@@ -602,7 +602,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = sandpoint_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = sandpoint_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = sandpoint_irq_cannonicalize;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = sandpoint_irq_canonicalize;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = sandpoint_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = sandpoint_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = sandpoint_init2;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/zx4500_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/platforms/zx4500_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/platforms/zx4500_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:43:31 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/platforms/zx4500_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -331,7 +331,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch = zx4500_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_cpuinfo = zx4500_show_cpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize = NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize = NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ = zx4500_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq = openpic_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init = NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/syslib/m8260_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/syslib/m8260_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/syslib/m8260_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:30 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/syslib/m8260_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch		= m8260_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo		= m8260_show_percpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize	= NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize	= NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ			= m8260_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq			= m8260_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init			= NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/arch/ppc/syslib/m8xx_setup.c linux/arch/ppc/syslib/m8xx_setup.c
--- bk-current/arch/ppc/syslib/m8xx_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:20 2003
+++ linux/arch/ppc/syslib/m8xx_setup.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -377,7 +377,7 @@
 
 	ppc_md.setup_arch		= m8xx_setup_arch;
 	ppc_md.show_percpuinfo		= m8xx_show_percpuinfo;
-	ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize	= NULL;
+	ppc_md.irq_canonicalize	= NULL;
 	ppc_md.init_IRQ			= m8xx_init_IRQ;
 	ppc_md.get_irq			= m8xx_get_irq;
 	ppc_md.init			= NULL;
diff -ur bk-current/drivers/char/synclink.c linux/drivers/char/synclink.c
--- bk-current/drivers/char/synclink.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:14 2003
+++ linux/drivers/char/synclink.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -4608,7 +4608,7 @@
 		/* Copy user configuration info to device instance data */
 		info->io_base = (unsigned int)io[i];
 		info->irq_level = (unsigned int)irq[i];
-		info->irq_level = irq_cannonicalize(info->irq_level);
+		info->irq_level = irq_canonicalize(info->irq_level);
 		info->dma_level = (unsigned int)dma[i];
 		info->bus_type = MGSL_BUS_TYPE_ISA;
 		info->io_addr_size = 16;
diff -ur bk-current/drivers/net/ac3200.c linux/drivers/net/ac3200.c
--- bk-current/drivers/net/ac3200.c	Wed Apr 23 07:44:54 2003
+++ linux/drivers/net/ac3200.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@
 		dev->irq = config2irq(inb(ioaddr + AC_CONFIG));
 		printk(", using");
 	} else {
-		dev->irq = irq_cannonicalize(dev->irq);
+		dev->irq = irq_canonicalize(dev->irq);
 		printk(", assigning");
 	}
 
diff -ur bk-current/drivers/serial/8250.c linux/drivers/serial/8250.c
--- bk-current/drivers/serial/8250.c	Wed Apr 23 07:43:42 2003
+++ linux/drivers/serial/8250.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -1830,7 +1830,7 @@
 	for (i = 0, up = serial8250_ports; i < ARRAY_SIZE(old_serial_port);
 	     i++, up++) {
 		up->port.iobase   = old_serial_port[i].port;
-		up->port.irq      = irq_cannonicalize(old_serial_port[i].irq);
+		up->port.irq      = irq_canonicalize(old_serial_port[i].irq);
 		up->port.uartclk  = old_serial_port[i].baud_base * 16;
 		up->port.flags    = old_serial_port[i].flags |
 				    UPF_RESOURCES;
diff -ur bk-current/drivers/serial/core.c linux/drivers/serial/core.c
--- bk-current/drivers/serial/core.c	Wed Apr 23 07:43:54 2003
+++ linux/drivers/serial/core.c	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -683,7 +683,7 @@
 	if (HIGH_BITS_OFFSET)
 		new_port += (unsigned long) new_serial.port_high << HIGH_BITS_OFFSET;
 
-	new_serial.irq = irq_cannonicalize(new_serial.irq);
+	new_serial.irq = irq_canonicalize(new_serial.irq);
 
 	/*
 	 * This semaphore protects state->count.  It is also
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-alpha/irq.h linux/include/asm-alpha/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-alpha/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:36 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-alpha/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@
 # define NR_IRQS	16
 #endif
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	/*
 	 * XXX is this true for all Alpha's?  The old serial driver
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-arc/irqs.h linux/include/asm-arm/arch-arc/irqs.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-arc/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:29 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/arch-arc/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -57,4 +57,4 @@
  */
 #define FIQ_START		64
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(i)	(i)
+#define irq_canonicalize(i)	(i)
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-ebsa285/irqs.h linux/include/asm-arm/arch-ebsa285/irqs.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-ebsa285/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:43:58 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/arch-ebsa285/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -95,4 +95,4 @@
 #define AUX_IRQ		(machine_is_netwinder() ? IRQ_NETWINDER_PS2MOUSE : IRQ_ISA_PS2MOUSE)
 #define IRQ_FLOPPYDISK	IRQ_ISA_FLOPPY
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(_i)	(((_i) == IRQ_ISA_CASCADE) ? IRQ_ISA_2 : _i)
+#define irq_canonicalize(_i)	(((_i) == IRQ_ISA_CASCADE) ? IRQ_ISA_2 : _i)
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-nexuspci/irqs.h linux/include/asm-arm/arch-nexuspci/irqs.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-nexuspci/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:02 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/arch-nexuspci/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -31,4 +31,4 @@
 /* timer is part of the DUART */
 #define IRQ_TIMER		IRQ_DUART
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(i)	(i)
+#define irq_canonicalize(i)	(i)
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-tbox/irqs.h linux/include/asm-arm/arch-tbox/irqs.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-arm/arch-tbox/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:34 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/arch-tbox/irqs.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -26,4 +26,4 @@
 #define IRQ_EXPMODCS0		12
 #define IRQ_EXPMODCS1		13
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(i)	(i)
+#define irq_canonicalize(i)	(i)
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-arm/irq.h linux/include/asm-arm/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-arm/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:41 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
 
 #include <asm/arch/irqs.h>
 
-#ifndef irq_cannonicalize
-#define irq_cannonicalize(i)	(i)
+#ifndef irq_canonicalize
+#define irq_canonicalize(i)	(i)
 #endif
 
 #ifndef NR_IRQS
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-h8300/irq.h linux/include/asm-h8300/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-h8300/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:43:50 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-h8300/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 
 #define IRQ_SCHED_TIMER	(40)    /* interrupt source for scheduling timer */
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return irq;
 }
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-i386/irq.h linux/include/asm-i386/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-i386/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:54 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-i386/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
 /* include comes from machine specific directory */
 #include "irq_vectors.h"
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return ((irq == 2) ? 9 : irq);
 }
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-ia64/irq.h linux/include/asm-ia64/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-ia64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:34 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-ia64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
  *	David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@hpl.hp.com>
  *	Stephane Eranian <eranian@hpl.hp.com>
  *
- * 11/24/98	S.Eranian 	updated TIMER_IRQ and irq_cannonicalize
+ * 11/24/98	S.Eranian 	updated TIMER_IRQ and irq_canonicalize
  * 01/20/99	S.Eranian	added keyboard interrupt
  * 02/29/00     D.Mosberger	moved most things into hw_irq.h
  */
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 #define NR_IRQS		256
 
 static __inline__ int
-irq_cannonicalize (int irq)
+irq_canonicalize (int irq)
 {
 	/*
 	 * We do the legacy thing here of pretending that irqs < 16
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-m68k/irq.h linux/include/asm-m68k/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-m68k/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:57 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-m68k/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@
 
 #define IRQ_SCHED_TIMER	(8)    /* interrupt source for scheduling timer */
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return irq;
 }
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-mips/irq.h linux/include/asm-mips/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-mips/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:43:47 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-mips/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -16,12 +16,12 @@
 #define TIMER_IRQ 0
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_I8259
-static inline int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static inline int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return ((irq == 2) ? 9 : irq);
 }
 #else
-#define irq_cannonicalize(irq) (irq)	/* Sane hardware, sane code ... */
+#define irq_canonicalize(irq) (irq)	/* Sane hardware, sane code ... */
 #endif
 
 struct irqaction;
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-mips64/irq.h linux/include/asm-mips64/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-mips64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:13 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-mips64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -34,12 +34,12 @@
 			(node_level_to_irq[CPUID_TO_COMPACT_NODEID(c)][(l)])
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_I8259
-static inline int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static inline int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return ((irq == 2) ? 9 : irq);
 }
 #else
-#define irq_cannonicalize(irq) (irq)	/* Sane hardware, sane code ... */
+#define irq_canonicalize(irq) (irq)	/* Sane hardware, sane code ... */
 #endif
 
 
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-parisc/irq.h linux/include/asm-parisc/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-parisc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:13 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-parisc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
 
 extern struct irq_region *irq_region[NR_IRQ_REGS];
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 #ifdef CONFIG_EISA
 	return (irq == (IRQ_FROM_REGION(EISA_IRQ_REGION)+2) 
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-ppc/irq.h linux/include/asm-ppc/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-ppc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:43:46 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-ppc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
 #define NR_IRQS		((NR_UIC_IRQS * NR_UICS) + NR_BOARD_IRQS)
 #endif
 static __inline__ int
-irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return (irq);
 }
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@
 #define	NR_IRQS		(NR_UIC_IRQS + NR_BOARD_IRQS)
 
 static __inline__ int
-irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return (irq);
 }
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@
 #define	mk_int_int_mask(IL) (1 << (7 - (IL/2)))
 
 /* always the same on 8xx -- Cort */
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return irq;
 }
@@ -196,10 +196,10 @@
  * powermacs as well as prep/chrp boxes.
  * Prep and chrp both have cascaded 8259 PICs.
  */
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
-	if (ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize)
-		return ppc_md.irq_cannonicalize(irq);
+	if (ppc_md.irq_canonicalize)
+		return ppc_md.irq_canonicalize(irq);
 	return irq;
 }
 
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-ppc/machdep.h linux/include/asm-ppc/machdep.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-ppc/machdep.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:01 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-ppc/machdep.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
 	int		(*show_cpuinfo)(struct seq_file *m);
 	int		(*show_percpuinfo)(struct seq_file *m, int i);
 	/* Optional, may be NULL. */
-	unsigned int	(*irq_cannonicalize)(unsigned int irq);
+	unsigned int	(*irq_canonicalize)(unsigned int irq);
 	void		(*init_IRQ)(void);
 	int		(*get_irq)(struct pt_regs *);
 	
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-ppc64/irq.h linux/include/asm-ppc64/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-ppc64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:38 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-ppc64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
  * powermacs as well as prep/chrp boxes.
  * Prep and chrp both have cascaded 8259 PICs.
  */
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return irq;
 }
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial-bigsur.h linux/include/asm-sh/serial-bigsur.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial-bigsur.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:57 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-sh/serial-bigsur.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -25,6 +25,6 @@
 #define SERIAL_PORT_DFNS STD_SERIAL_PORT_DEFNS
 
 /* XXX: This should be moved ino irq.h */
-#define irq_cannonicalize(x) (x)
+#define irq_canonicalize(x) (x)
 
 #endif /* _ASM_SERIAL_BIGSUR_H */
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial-ec3104.h linux/include/asm-sh/serial-ec3104.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial-ec3104.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:28 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-sh/serial-ec3104.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -21,4 +21,4 @@
 #define SERIAL_PORT_DFNS STD_SERIAL_PORT_DEFNS
 
 /* XXX: This should be moved ino irq.h */
-#define irq_cannonicalize(x) (x)
+#define irq_canonicalize(x) (x)
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial.h linux/include/asm-sh/serial.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-sh/serial.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:40 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-sh/serial.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@
 #define SERIAL_PORT_DFNS STD_SERIAL_PORT_DEFNS
 
 /* XXX: This should be moved ino irq.h */
-#define irq_cannonicalize(x) (x)
+#define irq_canonicalize(x) (x)
 
 #endif
 #endif /* _ASM_SERIAL_H */
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-sparc/irq.h linux/include/asm-sparc/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-sparc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:35 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-sparc/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
 
 #define NR_IRQS    16
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(irq)	(irq)
+#define irq_canonicalize(irq)	(irq)
 
 /* Dave Redman (djhr@tadpole.co.uk)
  * changed these to function pointers.. it saves cycles and will allow
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-sparc64/irq.h linux/include/asm-sparc64/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-sparc64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:44:34 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-sparc64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@
 
 #define NR_IRQS    16
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(irq)	(irq)
+#define irq_canonicalize(irq)	(irq)
 extern void disable_irq(unsigned int);
 #define disable_irq_nosync disable_irq
 extern void enable_irq(unsigned int);
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-v850/irq.h linux/include/asm-v850/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-v850/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:45:26 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-v850/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
 struct hw_interrupt_type;
 struct irqaction;
 
-#define irq_cannonicalize(irq)	(irq)
+#define irq_canonicalize(irq)	(irq)
 
 /* Initialize irq handling for IRQs.
    BASE_IRQ, BASE_IRQ+INTERVAL, ..., BASE_IRQ+NUM*INTERVAL
diff -ur bk-current/include/asm-x86_64/irq.h linux/include/asm-x86_64/irq.h
--- bk-current/include/asm-x86_64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:43:30 2003
+++ linux/include/asm-x86_64/irq.h	Wed Apr 23 07:49:34 2003
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
  */
 #define NR_IRQS 224
 
-static __inline__ int irq_cannonicalize(int irq)
+static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
 {
 	return ((irq == 2) ? 9 : irq);
 }

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Herman Oosthuysen]

Uhh, should that not be "canonize"?
(To conform to the canon)
You can save four more characters I would think... ;-)

Steven Cole wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 07:33, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> 
>>[me@qq linux-2.5.68-ref]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
>>     65
>>
>>
>>
>>  Avast there ye swabs, prepare to fire a broadside!
> 
> 
> Almost all of the spelling fixes from the Spelling Police were in
> comments, not code.  This mistaken spelling of canonicalize is mostly in
> various parts of the non-comment code. 

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Steven Cole]

On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 10:02, Herman Oosthuysen wrote:
> Uhh, should that not be "canonize"?
> (To conform to the canon)
> You can save four more characters I would think... ;-)
> 
> Steven Cole wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 07:33, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > 
> >>[me@qq linux-2.5.68-ref]$ grep -R cannonicalize * | wc -l
> >>     65
> >>
> >>  Avast there ye swabs, prepare to fire a broadside!
> > 
> > 
> > Almost all of the spelling fixes from the Spelling Police were in
> > comments, not code.  This mistaken spelling of canonicalize is mostly in
> > various parts of the non-comment code. 

Yeah, I thought about canonize vs canonicalize, but canonize has a long
religious history. Canonicalize has been coined rightly or wrongly by
computer folk.  See this:
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci841392,00.html

Steven "loose cannon among the Spelling Police" Cole

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Johannes Ruscheinski]

Also sprach Steven Cole:
>... 
> The fix.canon script used was this:
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> find . -name "*" | xargs grep -l cannonicalize | awk '{print "ex - ",$1," -c \"%s/cannonicalize/canonicalize/g|x\""}' | sh
> ...
Hi Steve,

As far as I know there is no such words as "canonicalize" in the English
language.  The proper word seems to be "canonize".  Since I'm not a native
speaker please take my comment with a grain of salt.
-- 
Johannes
--
Dr. Johannes Ruscheinski
EMail:    ruschein_AT_infomine.ucr.edu ***          Linux                  ***
Location: science library, room G40    *** The Choice Of A GNU Generation! ***
Phone:    (XXX) YYY-ZZZZ

"Perennial nuisance Charlton Heston pops up to declare that there are "too
 many people on the Earth as it is" and one realizes instantly that as
 president of the NRA, he is doing his best to correct that."
               -- Tom Shales, The Washington Post

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Miles Bader]

ruschein@mail-infomine.ucr.edu (Johannes Ruscheinski) writes:
> As far as I know there is no such words as "canonicalize" in the English
> language.

Call it a neologism; it's quite widely used among programmers, anyway.

> The proper word seems to be "canonize".

Um, no -- that means `to make a saint.'

-Miles
-- 
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
 that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
 less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.'  [The Economist]

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Johannes Ruscheinski]

Also sprach Miles Bader:
> ruschein@mail-infomine.ucr.edu (Johannes Ruscheinski) writes:
> > As far as I know there is no such words as "canonicalize" in the English
> > language.
> 
> Call it a neologism; it's quite widely used among programmers, anyway.
Most programmers don't know how to spell either.  Btw., I've been a programmer
for over 20 years.  Just because people don't know any better does not
necessarily make it correct.
> 
> > The proper word seems to be "canonize".
> 
> Um, no -- that means `to make a saint.'
Um, yes but -- it also means "to make canonical" according to http://www.m-w.com/.
> 
> -Miles
>...

Johannes
--
Dr. Johannes Ruscheinski
EMail:    ruschein_AT_infomine.ucr.edu ***          Linux                  ***
Location: science library, room G40    *** The Choice Of A GNU Generation! ***
Phone:    (909) 787-2279

"Perennial nuisance Charlton Heston pops up to declare that there are "too
 many people on the Earth as it is" and one realizes instantly that as
 president of the NRA, he is doing his best to correct that."
               -- Tom Shales, The Washington Post

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Miles Bader]

ruschein@mail-infomine.ucr.edu (Johannes Ruscheinski) writes:
> > Call it a neologism; it's quite widely used among programmers, anyway.
>
> Most programmers don't know how to spell either.  Btw., I've been a
> programmer for over 20 years.  Just because people don't know any
> better does not necessarily make it correct.

Well, actually, it does -- that's the nature of language.

Anyway, the real point is (1) whether or not people understand what it
means, and (2) is it a `gratuitous' invention, in the sense that its
being used by only a very few people in place of a more commonly
accepted word, _only_ because of ignorance.

I don't think (1) is an issue, since canonicalize is a straight-forward
construction; indeed, since the usual meaning of `canonize' is the one I
quoted, I guarantee that using it to mean `make canonical' will get you
a few puzzled looks.

As for (2), I can't speak for the wider population, but as I said, I've
heard `canonicalize' used by programmers quite often, whereas I've
never, ever, heard `canonize' used in this context.  I think one reason
for its popularity is that it has a sort of charmingly tongue-twisting
sound to it, and I suspect many people use it because of that even
though they realize it's `not quite right.'  IOW, there's a good reason
for its use, beyond the mere ignorance of a few.

Anyway, my take: keep canonicalize, it's hip, it's now.

:-|

-Miles
-- 
Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.
  			-- Walter Hines Page

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Alan Cox]

On Iau, 2003-04-24 at 04:53, Miles Bader wrote:
> ruschein@mail-infomine.ucr.edu (Johannes Ruscheinski) writes:
> > As far as I know there is no such words as "canonicalize" in the English
> > language.
> 
> Call it a neologism; it's quite widely used among programmers, anyway.
> 
> > The proper word seems to be "canonize".
> 
> Um, no -- that means `to make a saint.'

Means both. Its actually common Unixism since 1970's and probably pre
unix too. Even the tty layer enshrines it (there another reused
religious word 8)) - the normal mode is ICANON

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Herman Oosthuysen]

Wow, the tty layer is probably the oldest piece of surviving Unix code, 
so ICANON is a true religious artifact... ;-)


Alan Cox wrote:
>>>The proper word seems to be "canonize".
>>
>>Um, no -- that means `to make a saint.'
> 
> 
> Means both. Its actually common Unixism since 1970's and probably pre
> unix too. Even the tty layer enshrines it (there another reused
> religious word 8)) - the normal mode is ICANON
> 

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Kai Henningsen]

Herman@WirelessNetworksInc.com (Herman Oosthuysen)  wrote on 24.04.03 in <3EA86DED.50704@WirelessNetworksInc.com>:

> Wow, the tty layer is probably the oldest piece of surviving Unix code,

I'm pretty sure the Linux tty layer is not a piece of surviving Unix  
*code* at all. (Neither is the rest of Linux.) Look to *BSD for that.

The *interface*, and some parts of the design, may be - but so is the  
conceept of inodes, for example.

And considering that AFAIR Unix *started* as a micro-MULTICS where certain  
ex-MULTICS-project people could continue to play with filesystems ...

MfG Kai

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Steven Cole]

On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 21:39, Johannes Ruscheinski wrote:
> Also sprach Steven Cole:
> >... 
> > The fix.canon script used was this:
> > 
> > #!/bin/sh
> > find . -name "*" | xargs grep -l cannonicalize | awk '{print "ex - ",$1," -c \"%s/cannonicalize/canonicalize/g|x\""}' | sh
> > ...
> Hi Steve,
> 
> As far as I know there is no such words as "canonicalize" in the English
> language.  The proper word seems to be "canonize".  Since I'm not a native
> speaker please take my comment with a grain of salt.

Strictly speaking, you are probably right.  According to this:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=canonize
sense #2 would qualify "canonize".  I took the position that the only
person who could "canonize" anything is an elderly Polish fellow living
in Rome. But I've been wrong before.

The tortured variant "canonicalize" has seen enough usage to warrant
this related entry here:
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0%2c%2csid9_gci841392%2c00.html

As far as "no such words" go, a descriptive grammar is generally more
useful for human languages than a prescriptive grammar.  Healthy human
languages allow for growth.  See Tao Te Ching 76. (late night rambling)

Steven "verbalizing in his native language, where nouns and adjectives can be verbed" Cole

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Timothy Miller]

Steven Cole wrote:

>  
>
>Strictly speaking, you are probably right.  According to this:
>http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=canonize
>sense #2 would qualify "canonize".  I took the position that the only
>person who could "canonize" anything is an elderly Polish fellow living
>in Rome. But I've been wrong before.
>
>The tortured variant "canonicalize" has seen enough usage to warrant
>this related entry here:
>http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0%2c%2csid9_gci841392%2c00.html
>
>As far as "no such words" go, a descriptive grammar is generally more
>useful for human languages than a prescriptive grammar.  Healthy human
>languages allow for growth.  See Tao Te Ching 76. (late night rambling)
>
>Steven "verbalizing in his native language, where nouns and adjectives can be verbed" Cole
>  
>

There is a subtle issue that we need to consider regarding "canonize" 
and its meaning of "to make canonical".

Are we saying:

(a) To add something to the canon

or

(b) To change something so that it conforms to the canon


"Canonize" is ambiguous.  Its first definition, to make into a saint, in 
fact conforms to (a) above, which, I believe, is NOT the definition we 
want!  In fact, all of the m-w.com definitions conform to (a).

Unless I misunderstand, we are not adding anything to the canon here. 
 So even if (b) is (somewhere) an acceptable meaning of "canonize" the 
ambiguity obscures what we're intending to say.

On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
means (b).

Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[viro]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote:
 
> On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
> means (b).
> 
> Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?

% webster normalize
nor-mal-ize \'no[0xC7]r-me-,l[0xF5]^-z\ vt  -ized; -iz-ing
(1865)
1: to make conform to or reduce to a norm or standard
2: to make normal (as by a transformation of variables)
3: to bring or restore (as relations between countries) to a normal
     condition
-- nor-mal-iz-able \-,l[0xF5]^--ze-bel\ adj 
-- nor-mal-iza-tion \,no[0xC7]r-me-le-'za^--shen\ n 

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Herman Oosthuysen]

This is getting funnier by the day!

Even the word 'normal' is a religious term.  It literally means to be a 
good Christian - a Gentleman.  Christian seminaries are 'Normal Schools' 
and have 'Normal Classes'.  Yes, there was a time when I was forced to 
attend 'Normal Class' - it didn't help - I became a heathen...

Maybe we should switch to Zen Buddist terminology instead, it is less 
violent.

For what it is worth, I grew up with the software term 'normalize'. 
'Canonize' seems a bit too strong for my tase.


viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote:
>  
> 
>>On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
>>means (b).
>>
>>Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
> 
> 
> % webster normalize
> nor-mal-ize \'no[0xC7]r-me-,l[0xF5]^-z\ vt  -ized; -iz-ing
> (1865)
> 1: to make conform to or reduce to a norm or standard
> 2: to make normal (as by a transformation of variables)
> 3: to bring or restore (as relations between countries) to a normal
>      condition
> -- nor-mal-iz-able \-,l[0xF5]^--ze-bel\ adj 
> -- nor-mal-iza-tion \,no[0xC7]r-me-le-'za^--shen\ n 
> -

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Timothy Miller]

Herman Oosthuysen wrote:

> This is getting funnier by the day!
>
> Even the word 'normal' is a religious term.  It literally means to be 
> a good Christian - a Gentleman.  Christian seminaries are 'Normal 
> Schools' and have 'Normal Classes'.  Yes, there was a time when I was 
> forced to attend 'Normal Class' - it didn't help - I became a heathen...
>
> Maybe we should switch to Zen Buddist terminology instead, it is less 
> violent.
>
> For what it is worth, I grew up with the software term 'normalize'. 
> 'Canonize' seems a bit too strong for my tase.
>
>

I hope we're not being too bothersome by straying so far off topic.....


Anyhow, I see it all as metaphor.  I used to be concerned about such 
things, but I find it easiest to just use whatever term best represents 
what I'm trying to say, even if there's some religious connotation that 
makes me uneasy.  I only avoid the words that would get me beat up.

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Steven Cole]

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 09:09, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote:
>  
> > On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
> > means (b).
> > 
> > Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
> 
> % webster normalize
> nor-mal-ize \'no[0xC7]r-me-,l[0xF5]^-z\ vt  -ized; -iz-ing
> (1865)
> 1: to make conform to or reduce to a norm or standard
> 2: to make normal (as by a transformation of variables)
> 3: to bring or restore (as relations between countries) to a normal
>      condition

Thanks Al.  I've been looking for a good English substitute for
"rapprochement" (in the spirit of Freedom Fries).  Sense 3 shows that
"normalize" is clearly a candidate, but it lacks the same panache. ;)

Steven

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Kai Henningsen]

elenstev@mesatop.com (Steven Cole)  wrote on 24.04.03 in <1051199254.29423.38.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov>:

> Thanks Al.  I've been looking for a good English substitute for
> "rapprochement" (in the spirit of Freedom Fries).

I'm not familiar with a definition for "good" that means, approximately,  
"an extremely silly version of the worst imaginable political  
correctness".

MfG Kai

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Timothy Miller]

viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:

>On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote:
> 
>  
>
>>On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
>>means (b).
>>
>>Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
>>    
>>
>
>% webster normalize
>nor-mal-ize \'no[0xC7]r-me-,l[0xF5]^-z\ vt  -ized; -iz-ing
>(1865)
>1: to make conform to or reduce to a norm or standard
>2: to make normal (as by a transformation of variables)
>3: to bring or restore (as relations between countries) to a normal
>     condition
>-- nor-mal-iz-able \-,l[0xF5]^--ze-bel\ adj 
>-- nor-mal-iza-tion \,no[0xC7]r-me-le-'za^--shen\ n 
>
>
>  
>

Yeah, that works pretty well, but there's more we can debate about.  :)

(a) Are "normal" and "canonical" necessarily equivalent?  They certainly 
aren't in Psychiatry.

(b) Are people going to know what we're talking about when we say 
"normalize" as well as they do when they see "canonicalize".


As a person who enjoyed studying Linguistics and hated studying English, 
I prefer to take the liberal (descriptive, rather than prescriptive) 
stance and vote in favor of the use of the word "canonilcalize".  But 
the debate isn't over, and I'm willing to change my opinion (not that it 
really matters...).

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Herman Oosthuysen]

To many programmers, computer code 'is' religion.  That probably 
explains the migration of religious terms into computer speak.  Also, to 
outsiders, computers are magic, which is a close cousin of religion, so 
using the term 'canonize' in its full religious fervour, would be very 
apt...

It has been revealed to me by Google, that the Apache project uses 
'canonicalize', so the web Gods seem to be looking kindly upon this use 
of the term.

Being of Germanic descent though, 'canonicalize' appears to me, to be a 
'Germanism'.  I do not think it came to be in an act of bad faith, but 
came forth simply due to the culture of some users of the term. However, 
that doesn't mean that we should bless the use of 'automatize' instead 
of 'automate' and 'canonicalize' instead of 'canonize' in English, it 
being a sufficiently convoluted pagan language already.
;-)


Timothy Miller wrote:
> 
> 
> Steven Cole wrote:
> 
>>  
>>
>> Strictly speaking, you are probably right.  According to this:
>> http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=canonize
>> sense #2 would qualify "canonize".  I took the position that the only
>> person who could "canonize" anything is an elderly Polish fellow living
>> in Rome. But I've been wrong before.

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Timothy Miller]

Herman Oosthuysen wrote:

> To many programmers, computer code 'is' religion.  That probably 
> explains the migration of religious terms into computer speak.  Also, 
> to outsiders, computers are magic, which is a close cousin of 
> religion, so using the term 'canonize' in its full religious fervour, 
> would be very apt...
>

Most certainly.... if we were talking about adding things to the canon, 
which we are not.

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Chuck Ebbert]

Al Viro wrote:


>> On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
>> means (b).
>> 
>> Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
>
>% webster normalize


  There is a subtle difference between 'normal' and 'canonical',
but I can't quite put my finger on it.  In number theory there's
a thorem that says:

   Any positive integer n > 1 can be written uniquely in a
   'canonical form'

         n = p[1]**k[1] * p[2]**k[2] * ... * p[r]**k[r]

   where, for i = 1,2,...,r, each k[i] is a positive integer
   and each p[i] is a prime, with p[1] < p[2] < ... < p[r].


  Note that it says 'a' canonical form, not 'the' canonical
form.  I would argue that what is used in the above is 'normal
canonical form.'  (And there is only one other canonical form
possible.)


------
 Chuck

Re: How did the Spelling Police miss this one?

[Steven Cole]

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 17:25, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> Al Viro wrote:
> 
> 
> >> On the other hand, "canonicalize", while strange and new, unambiguously 
> >> means (b).
> >> 
> >> Is there an already-existing word which means (b)?
> >
> >% webster normalize
> 
> 
>   There is a subtle difference between 'normal' and 'canonical',
> but I can't quite put my finger on it. 

Another sense of "normal" is as in "normal vector", which is
perpendicular or orthogonal to a surface.  Orthogonal is a good
description of what this thread has become, but that's normal.

Steven