Correct spelling of some client messages, comments and function names
This commit is contained in:
24
source/who.c
24
source/who.c
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ CVS_REVISION(who_c)
|
||||
|
||||
#define WHO_INVISIBLE 0x2000
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* This is tricky -- this doesnt get the LAST one, it gets the
|
||||
* This is tricky -- this doesn't get the LAST one, it gets the
|
||||
* next to the last one. Why? Because the LAST one is the one
|
||||
* asking, and they want to know who is LAST (before them)
|
||||
* So it sucks. Sue me.
|
||||
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ void BX_whobase(char *args, void (*line) (WhoEntry *, char *, char **), void (*e
|
||||
{
|
||||
if ((arg = next_arg(args, &args)) == NULL)
|
||||
{
|
||||
say("WHO -SERVER: missing arguement");
|
||||
say("WHO -SERVER: missing argument");
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ void BX_whobase(char *args, void (*line) (WhoEntry *, char *, char **), void (*e
|
||||
{
|
||||
if ((arg = next_arg(args, &args)) == NULL)
|
||||
{
|
||||
say("WHO -NAME: missing arguement");
|
||||
say("WHO -NAME: missing argument");
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ void BX_whobase(char *args, void (*line) (WhoEntry *, char *, char **), void (*e
|
||||
{
|
||||
if ((arg = next_arg(args, &args)) == NULL)
|
||||
{
|
||||
say("WHO -REALNAME: missing arguement");
|
||||
say("WHO -REALNAME: missing argument");
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ void BX_whobase(char *args, void (*line) (WhoEntry *, char *, char **), void (*e
|
||||
{
|
||||
if ((arg = next_arg(args, &args)) == NULL)
|
||||
{
|
||||
say("WHO -NICK: missing arguement");
|
||||
say("WHO -NICK: missing argument");
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ void BX_whobase(char *args, void (*line) (WhoEntry *, char *, char **), void (*e
|
||||
|
||||
void quote_whine(char *type)
|
||||
{
|
||||
yell("### Please dont do /QUOTE %s. Use /%s instead", type, type);
|
||||
yell("### Please don't do /QUOTE %s. Use /%s instead", type, type);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ do
|
||||
*/
|
||||
new_w->dirty = 1;
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* We dont always want to use this function.
|
||||
* We don't always want to use this function.
|
||||
* If another function is supposed to do the work for us,
|
||||
* we yield to them.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
@@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ void who_end (char *from, char **ArgList)
|
||||
do
|
||||
{
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Defer to another function, if neccesary.
|
||||
* Defer to another function, if necessary.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (new_w->end)
|
||||
{
|
||||
@@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ void userhost_returned (char *from, char **ArgList)
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Otherwise, the user just did /userhost,
|
||||
* so we offer the numeric, and if the user
|
||||
* doesnt bite, we output to the screen.
|
||||
* doesn't bite, we output to the screen.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
else if (do_hook(current_numeric, "%s %s %s %s %s",
|
||||
item.nick,
|
||||
@@ -993,10 +993,10 @@ void userhost_returned (char *from, char **ArgList)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* If ArgList isnt the current nick, then the current nick
|
||||
* If ArgList isn't the current nick, then the current nick
|
||||
* must not be on irc. So we whip up a dummy UserhostItem
|
||||
* and send it on its way. We DO NOT HOOK the 302 numeric
|
||||
* with this bogus entry, because thats the historical
|
||||
* with this bogus entry, because that's the historical
|
||||
* behavior. This can cause a problem if you do a USERHOST
|
||||
* and wait on the 302 numeric. I think waiting on the 302
|
||||
* numeric is stupid, anyhow.
|
||||
@@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ void userhost_returned (char *from, char **ArgList)
|
||||
* Of course, only if the user asked for a callback
|
||||
* via /userhost -cmd or a direct call to userhostbase.
|
||||
* If the user just did /userhost, and the nicks arent
|
||||
* on, then we just dont display anything.
|
||||
* on, then we just don't display anything.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (top->func)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user