On Sat, Jan 4, 2025 at 12:22 AM Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Jim,
Hi again :-)
> > I'm surprised that you would use "more sources use Y" as a rationale
> > for using Y.
>
> I do so for language-related topics. Because language gets defined by
> how people use it in their majority.
>
> Like you, I'm
Hi Jim,
> I'm surprised that you would use "more sources use Y" as a rationale
> for using Y.
I do so for language-related topics. Because language gets defined by
how people use it in their majority.
Like you, I'm not generally in favour of accepting majority votes
- for determining what are
On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 8:04 PM Bruno Haible via Gnulib discussion list
wrote:
>
> Paul Eggert wrote:
> > I'm more familiar with the longstanding tradition of Emacs, where the
> > manual says "This function returns X." and the doc strings (which is
> > closer to what we're talking about here) say "
Paul Eggert wrote:
> I'm more familiar with the longstanding tradition of Emacs, where the
> manual says "This function returns X." and the doc strings (which is
> closer to what we're talking about here) say "Return X." In both cases
> English-language sentences are used.
>
> Of course other s
On 2025-01-03 13:09, Bruno Haible wrote:
Paul Eggert wrote:
* The comments in string.in.h should be imperative sentences. E.g., say
"Return true if ..." not "Returns true if ...". Doing it this way is a
bit briefer and is more likely to result in valid English sentences.
You know that I disagre
Paul Eggert wrote:
> * The comments in string.in.h should be imperative sentences. E.g., say
> "Return true if ..." not "Returns true if ...". Doing it this way is a
> bit briefer and is more likely to result in valid English sentences.
You know that I disagree with that.
The style that I am us
