This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages?

From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
To: Paul Koning <paul_koning at dell dot com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder at vmware dot com>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 08:35:22 +0400
Subject: Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages?
References: <4D718A22.3020302@vmware.com> <20110307105158.GZ30306@adacore.com> <4D752A3B.6090603@vmware.com> <C6938A0D-9D31-48BA-A62B-D79003BD02BC@dell.com>

> > My $0.02 -- I don't think there's anything wrong with contractions.
> > They're a part of standard English.
> 
> True.  But they are less familiar to those who are not native speakers.

OK, I think I might have been a little extreme, then, in my judgement
of contractions. I don't think it's question of familiarity, since
I remember learning about them fairly early on, if not in my first
English lesson. Interesting discussion, though :).

-- 
Joel

References:
- [commit] symfile.c (simple_overlay_update): Check for null return.
  - From: Michael Snyder
- can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages? (was: "[commit] symfile.c (simple_overlay_update): Check for null return.")
  - From: Joel Brobecker
- Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages?
  - From: Michael Snyder
- Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages?
  - From: Paul Koning

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]