On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 04:12:19PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 09:28:14PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Hi Wilfried,
> > 
> > [email protected] wrote on Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 08:20:59PM +0200:
> > 
> > > Synopsis: Maverick word in the sort(1) manpage
> > > Category: documentation
> > [...]
> > > There is a superfluous word in the description of the --random-source
> > > option of the sort(1) manpage. The second sentence contains
> > > "will use produce" which probably should just be "will produce".
> > 
> > Committed, thanks for reporting.
> > 
> > While there, i also deleted the word "will".  Manuals usually do not
> > need future tense, except in unusual situations.
> > 
> > Yours,
> >   Ingo
> > 
> > 
> > The paragraph now reads:
> > 
> >    --random-source=filename
> >        For random sort, the contents of filename are used as the source
> >        of the `seed' data for the hash function.  Two invocations of
> >        random sort with the same seed data produce the same result if
> >        the input is also identical.  By default, the arc4random_buf(3)
> >        function is used instead.
> > 
> > 
> Hum... I've looked around at my own manpages. Actually, careful use of 
> tenses tend to make documentation feel slightly less "dry" in a lot of
> cases, thus actually making it MORE readable in the end.
> 
> I'm not sure removing that specific "will" is a good idea. It's not future
> tense.  It's (whatever it's called in English ?) that modal that says that 
> this WILL predictably happen (instead  of SHOULD or MAY) thus adding 
> welcome emphasis instead of just saying things dryly like you do.
> 

hi.

there is an element of preference in these choices, that's true. but i
am confident many people (native and non-native) find it easier to read
without modals, and with fewer words. i totaly back ingo's change in
this bit of text. that's not to lessen your preference, i just think
it's a good rule of thumb for us to keep text simple and clear. modals
really wreck people's heads.

jmc

Reply via email to