From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 1d4862e: Fix English grammar in some doc strings and comments Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:01 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: References: <14407.1572888070@quatro> <8736f3js95.fsf@fastmail.fm> <871runxqjq.fsf@gmx.net> <87eeyj8nqr.fsf@gnus.org> <9ccae76c-07a2-1739-d4b0-5c13164145d3@cs.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="56301"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 Cc: Emacs Development To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 08 22:32:07 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iTBrT-000EWT-1x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 22:32:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60698 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iTBrR-0006Y8-Sp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 16:32:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59211) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iTBqT-0006Xo-QZ for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 16:31:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iTBqS-0008TN-HZ for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 16:31:05 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:57844) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iTBqS-0008Ry-A3 for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 16:31:04 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807FA16022E; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:02 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id KMVbcrYDgABk; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:01 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC98B160111; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id KSctSkVy6QrC; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:01 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-23-242-74-103.socal.res.rr.com [23.242.74.103]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A843916022E; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:31:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:242007 Archived-At: On 11/7/19 8:24 PM, Juanma Barranquero wrote: >> -This function only handles buffers that are visiting files. >> +This function handles only buffers that are visiting files. > there's no additional clarity. It could also be argued that, in those cases > where the result is less natural-sounding it diminishes clarity, I'm not aware of any such cases. To my ear, the revised text in the example you gave is just as natural-sounding as the original. I agree that we shouldn't be pedantic about "only" in places where that would reduce clarity. I'm willing to put up with these less-important changes, if consistent use of the style helps to fix confusion elsewhere (as that patch did). It's akin to preferring signed to unsigned arithmetic in C code - even in places where this makes no real difference - because being reasonably consistent about preferring signed arithmetic helps makes Emacs more reliable overall.