On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:38:05AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Andrew Jeffery <and...@aj.id.au> wrote: > > > Literally. > > > > I expect "lose" was meant here, rather than "loose", though you could > > feasibly > > use a somewhat uncommon definition of "loose" to mean what would be meant by > > "lose": "Loose the hounds" for instance, as in "Release the hounds". > > Substituting in "value" for "hounds" gives "release the value", and makes > > some > > sense, but futher substituting back to loose gives "loose the value" which > > overall just seems a bit anachronistic. > > > > Instead, use modern, pragmatic English and save a character. > > > > Cc: Russell Currey <rus...@russell.cc> > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <and...@aj.id.au> > > Patch applied as obviously correct. >
Indeed yes very sorry for that one, for some reason I have always had a massive blind spot for those two words. You really wouldn't think English was my first language. Thanks, Charles
