invokable -> invocable false positive?

[justanotheranonymoususer]

English is not my native language, but I saw invokable in code, and looks like both invokable and invocable are OK?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/invocable
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/functional/invoke

[epage]

I wish wikitionary had citations. Google always tries to correct invokable to invocable. There is no varcon entry for this. Oxford English Dictionary does not recognize invokable.

Some dictionaries, like Firefox and Libreoffice, don't recognize either word.

[not-my-profile]

I think Google Ngram's is a good tool to judge whether something is a typo or just less common.

invocable,invokable: it appears to be less common but common enough to be a spelling variant.

[justanotheranonymoususer]

Yeah, Googling for it shows that it's used in docs and identifiers of high profile companies such as Microsoft, Google and Oracle.

• https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/dn910268(v=vs.85)
• https://guava.dev/releases/19.0/api/docs/com/google/common/reflect/Invokable.html
• https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E16162_01/apirefs.1112/e17493/oracle/ide/palette/Invokable.html
• https://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Athens/en/Understanding_Invokable_Interfaces
• http://jmock.org/javadoc/jmock-2.6.0/doc/org/jmock/api/Invokable.html
• https://laravel.com/docs/11.x/controllers

I think that calling it a typo is a stretch given that broad usage.