Re: master 95e8c7d 1/2: ; Fix typos

[Stefan Kangas]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> But it is true that it would be preferable if the code matched the
>> documentation.  In the interest of consistency we are better off
>> sticking to one spelling.  Note that we already had around 40 other
>> instances of "parsable" in our source tree.
>
> Since renaming symbols involves some pain, do we really need to be
> 100% consistent here?

I personally don't have a very strong opinion either way, FWIW.