From 34a79f9d4a19aee68ec6f80d51e1111e4b8df9c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marco Kaufmann <83189575+kaufco@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 16:33:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Update rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc

Co-authored-by: leonardo-pilastri-sonarsource <115481625+leonardo-pilastri-sonarsource@users.noreply.github.com>
---
 rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc b/rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc
index 4702a3ea0c4..e7f29188837 100644
--- a/rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc
+++ b/rules/S6877/java/rule.adoc
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ On the other hand, `Collection.reverse(List)` creates a completely new list that
 `SequencedCollection.reversed()` should be the preferred method for two reasons:
 
 1. It returns a more lightweight object, as it does not need to recreate the underlying data structure as `Collection.reverse(List)` does. It merely provides a wrapper for element access and the iterator.
-2. It abstracts from the fact that the instance to which the call is applied is a list. This results in more generic code that is easier to port, for instance, when you want to use another collection data structure.
+2. It abstracts from the fact that the collection instance is a list. This results in more generic code that is easier to port, for instance, when you want to use another collection data structure.
 
 == How to fix it