Fix typos in >60 files using codespell & manual review to get rid of false positives

[corneliusroemer]

If you'd like me to get rid of non-super-unanimous fixes and/or split into multiple PRs let me know.

Examples of "arguable" fixes / common "errors":

• "referencable" (instead of "referenceable")
• "targetted" (instead of "targeted")
• "uncompressible" (instead of "incompressible)
• "knowledgable" (instead of "knowledgeable")
• "preferrable" (instead of "preferable")

Codespell is overly opinionated in many cases, but I've gotten rid of these already (e.g. it really doesn't like re-use, this would cause ~50 more changes which I've rejected already)

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--136887.org.readthedocs.build/

[AA-Turner]

Please avoid large PRs like this, they're hard to review and generally unhelpful (e.g. spelling errors in comments have no real impact).

A

[ZeroIntensity]

Yeah, I feel like I inspired this by approving #136884. We want typo fixes in public documentation and docstrings, we don't care too much about comments.

[corneliusroemer]

I checked discourse and comment fixes were in-scope per @brettcannon: https://discuss.python.org/t/fixing-simple-typo-in-comment-not-document/2297/2

So you prefer more but smaller PRs focused on docstrings/public documentation?

[AA-Turner]

I'd prefer that we spent resources working on more productive things than spelling mistakes! If you do choose to submit these changes again, though, please have only have one PR open at once and do the changes in small batches, where end users are most affected.

A

[ZeroIntensity]

To be fair, that post is from 2019. I think our workflow has changed a bit since then.