Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:35:46 -0400
> From: emacs-diffs-request@gnu.org
> 
> Index: src/w32inevt.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /sources/emacs/emacs/src/w32inevt.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.40
> retrieving revision 1.41
> diff -u -b -r1.40 -r1.41
> --- src/w32inevt.c	14 May 2008 07:50:07 -0000	1.40
> +++ src/w32inevt.c	27 Jun 2008 07:34:53 -0000	1.41
> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@
>    if (mods & SCROLLLOCK_ON)
>      retval |= w32_key_to_modifier (VK_SCROLL);
>  
> -  /* Just in case someone wanted the original behaviour, make it
> +  /* Just in case someone wanted the original behavior, make it

Thanks, but are changes like this one really worth the trouble?  Looks
like a terrible waste of energy (and bandwidth) to me.

If it were just one or two, fine; but I just counted about 10 dozens
of files, some of them quite old, modified like this.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:21, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> Thanks, but are changes like this one really worth the trouble?  Looks
> like a terrible waste of energy (and bandwidth) to me.

I've been guilty of such a "waste of energy" a couple times or five
(most famously the time that I removed trailing whitespace in 600 or
700 files at once) so take what I say with a whole kg. of salt...

But in this case, I'd like to point out that comments and ChangeLog
entries are not the public interface of Emacs, so I'm not sure of the
propriety of changing "behaviour" -> "behavior" and "generalise" ->
"generalize" etc. I've always felt that it was the committer's
prerogative to use his/her native idiolect in such cases.

  Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Miles Bader]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> -  /* Just in case someone wanted the original behaviour, make it
>> +  /* Just in case someone wanted the original behavior, make it
>
> Thanks, but are changes like this one really worth the trouble?  Looks
> like a terrible waste of energy (and bandwidth) to me.

Not to mention a generator of annoying merge conflicts.

I don't think we should do things like this, it's just pointless churn.

-Miles

-- 
Neighbor, n. One whom we are commanded to love as ourselves, and who does all
he knows how to make us disobedient.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Stefan Monnier]

> Thanks, but are changes like this one really worth the trouble?  Looks
> like a terrible waste of energy (and bandwidth) to me.

> If it were just one or two, fine; but I just counted about 10 dozens
> of files, some of them quite old, modified like this.

Agreed.  I think we should make a point of accepting "any English".


        Stefan

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:56, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> Agreed.  I think we should make a point of accepting "any English".

I think it is a good idea to standardize on one variant in public
interfaces (documentation, docstrings, etc.) Language variability is
beautiful, but it might look as sloppy editing in a document.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:05:50 +0200
> From: "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com>
> Cc: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>, "Glenn Morris" <rgm@gnu.org>, 
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:56, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> 
> > Agreed.  I think we should make a point of accepting "any English".
> 
> I think it is a good idea to standardize on one variant in public
> interfaces (documentation, docstrings, etc.) Language variability is
> beautiful, but it might look as sloppy editing in a document.

I would even support requests to use US variants at the time patches
are posted here, or otherwise discussed.  But to go back several years
and fix old log entries sounds way too far-fetched to me.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:12, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> I would even support requests to use US variants at the time patches
> are posted here, or otherwise discussed.  But to go back several years
> and fix old log entries sounds way too far-fetched to me.

Hmm. I've often fixed typos in ChangeLog entries several years old. My
(very weak) objection to this change is not related to time, but
(perceived, and highly subjective) adequacy or lack thereof.

  Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Miles Bader]

I didn't realize you had gone and done it to just about every file in
emacs.  Without any (apparent) warning.

In the future, before making changes that touch huge numbers of
files, please post here and ask whether it's OK first!  Particularly for
changes that are of dubious utility.

-Miles

-- 
Future, n. That period of time in which our affairs prosper, our friends
are true and our happiness is assured.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:56, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> wrote:

> I didn't realize you had gone and done it to just about every file in
> emacs.

Well, let's not exaggerate. About 120 files, i.e., little more than 4%
of trunk (number-of-files-wise).

  Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Miles Bader]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:
>> I didn't realize you had gone and done it to just about every file in
>> emacs.
>
> Well, let's not exaggerate. About 120 files, i.e., little more than 4%
> of trunk (number-of-files-wise).

Point taken... :-/

Still, such changes should be run through the mailing list first.

-Miles

-- 
Acquaintance, n. A person whom we know well enough to borrow from, but not
well enough to lend to.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <f7ccd24b0806270305m575f51u55ed49bc65b3c13@mail.gmail.com>, "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:56, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> > Agreed.  I think we should make a point of accepting "any English".

> I think it is a good idea to standardize on one variant in public
> interfaces (documentation, docstrings, etc.) Language variability is
> beautiful, but it might look as sloppy editing in a document.

My ispell suggests "standardise" for "standardize".

Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more
helpful thing is to standardise which word to use
(e.g. remove/delete, replace/substitute,
accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain, put/set/store,
property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
cancel/undo, etc.) :-p

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Miles Bader]

Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> writes:
> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more
> helpful thing is to standardise which word to use
> (e.g. remove/delete, replace/substitute,
> accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain, put/set/store,
> property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
> cancel/undo, etc.) :-p

It would be very helpful for native speakers as well, to standardize
those things ... :-)

[Obviously for some of them there's historical precedent in emacs, but
that isn't always clear without a lot of groveling around.]

-Miles
-- 
Opposition, n. In politics the party that prevents the Goverment from running
amok by hamstringing it.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> CC: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, rgm@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:16:25 +0900
> 
> My ispell suggests "standardise" for "standardize".

"standardise" is the UK spelling, not the US spelling.

When you type "M-x ispell-change-dictionary RET ?", does the list of
possible completions include "american" or something similar?  If it
does, try selecting that dictionary.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <u1w2jdpjv.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> > From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> > CC: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, rgm@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:16:25 +0900
> > 
> > My ispell suggests "standardise" for "standardize".

> "standardise" is the UK spelling, not the US spelling.

> When you type "M-x ispell-change-dictionary RET ?", does the list of
> possible completions include "american" or something similar?  If it
> does, try selecting that dictionary.

It lists "amerian", "british", and "default".

By M-x ispell-change-dictionary RET american RET, my ispell
started to accept "standardise".  But, when I select
"default", it seems that ispell get back to "british".

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 14:01, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> wrote:

> Still, such changes should be run through the mailing list first.

Agreed.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 14:16, Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> wrote:

> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more
> helpful thing is to standardise which word to use

I was in 100% agreement with you until...

> (e.g. remove/delete

...you broke my Common Lisp heart. In a destructive way.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

Stylistic consistency is a good thing, so I'm glad Glen made these
changes.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> CC: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
>         rgm@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:52:38 +0900
> 
> By M-x ispell-change-dictionary RET american RET, my ispell
> started to accept "standardise".

You mean "standardize", right?

> But, when I select "default", it seems that ispell get back to
> "british".

As I wrote elsewhere, you can change the default dictionary in Emacs.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Agustin Martin]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:52:38PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
> By M-x ispell-change-dictionary RET american RET, my ispell
> started to accept "standardise".  But, when I select
> "default", it seems that ispell get back to "british".

That means that the /usr/lib/ispell/default.{aff,hash} symlinks point to
the ispell British dictionary. Why British is set instead of American depends
on your distro, it might be hardcoded, it might be the result of en_{GB,UK}
being alphabetically before en_US when trying to guess a choice if there is
no exact match for your Japanese locale, ....

If there is no way to spellcheck Japanese with {ispell,flyspell}.el, you may
want to set ispell-local-dictionary to "american" (otherwise that may
interfere with your native spellchecking). If you want that only
when writing lisp code, there is surely an appropriate hook for that.

-- 
Agustin

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> CC: rgm@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:38:46 -0400
> 
> Stylistic consistency is a good thing, so I'm glad Glen made these
> changes.

I just think all that energy could have been invested in more useful
ways, that's all.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Glenn Morris]

Miles Bader wrote:

> Still, such changes should be run through the mailing list first.

Dear mailing list,

I propose to fix the spellings of: honour, initialise, neighbour,
optimise, recognise.

Lines to be affected: ~ 0.006%.

Discuss.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

> Dear mailing list,
>
> I propose to fix the spellings of: honour, initialise, neighbour,
> optimise, recognise.
>
> Lines to be affected: ~ 0.006%.
>
> Discuss.

Is nice to know that criticism does not affect you.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Jason Rumney]

Glenn Morris wrote:
> Miles Bader wrote:
> 
>> Still, such changes should be run through the mailing list first.
> 
> Dear mailing list,
> 
> I propose to fix the spellings of: honour, initialise, neighbour,
> optimise, recognise.
> 
> Lines to be affected: ~ 0.006%.
> 
> Discuss.

The Burma / Myanmar renaming was understandable as a political statement
given the events that were happening at the time. But what exactly have
the British done to trigger this?

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <f7ccd24b0806270646i2a689698ucc9928d595a12e0c@mail.gmail.com>, "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 14:16, Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org> wrote:
> > Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more
> > helpful thing is to standardise which word to use

> I was in 100% agreement with you until...

> > (e.g. remove/delete

> ...you broke my Common Lisp heart. In a destructive way.

Sorry, but I can't catch what you mean.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

>> > (e.g. remove/delete
>
>> ...you broke my Common Lisp heart. In a destructive way.
>
> Sorry, but I can't catch what you mean.

It was a lame attempt at humor; you're excused for not getting it.
remove and delete are groups of functions (remove, remove-if,
remove-if-not, ec.) with similar behavior, but the remove* ones are
non-destructive (they return a new list) while the delete* ones are
destructive. So you wanting to conflate both terms produced a
cognitive disonance :)

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <f7ccd24b0806271807w316927cbt97f68fe02a7c48cf@mail.gmail.com>, "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> It was a lame attempt at humor; you're excused for not getting it.
> remove and delete are groups of functions (remove, remove-if,
> remove-if-not, ec.) with similar behavior, but the remove* ones are
> non-destructive (they return a new list) while the delete* ones are
> destructive. So you wanting to conflate both terms produced a
> cognitive disonance :)

Ah!  :-)

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <20080627165431.GA4465@agmartin.aq.upm.es>, Agustin Martin <agustin.martin@hispalinux.es> writes:

> That means that the /usr/lib/ispell/default.{aff,hash} symlinks point to
> the ispell British dictionary. Why British is set instead of American depends
> on your distro, it might be hardcoded, it might be the result of en_{GB,UK}
> being alphabetically before en_US when trying to guess a choice if there is
> no exact match for your Japanese locale, ....

Thank you.  I found that the symlink points to British dict.
As I don't know the correct way to change it
("% dpkg-reconfigure ispell" didn't work), I just re-installed
packages "ispell", "iamerican", "ibritish" in en_US locale.
Then, the default is set to American dict.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:14:47 -0400
> Cc: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I propose to fix the spellings of: honour, initialise, neighbour,
> optimise, recognise.

What for?

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

    The Burma / Myanmar renaming was understandable as a political statement
    given the events that were happening at the time. But what exactly have
    the British done to trigger this?

Nothing _now_.  Emacs used to use American spellings uniformly,
but inconsistencies have crept in over the years.  It was just now
that we noticed them and Glenn volunteered to clean them up.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 09:20:24 -0400
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
>     The Burma / Myanmar renaming was understandable as a political statement
>     given the events that were happening at the time. But what exactly have
>     the British done to trigger this?
> 
> Nothing _now_.  Emacs used to use American spellings uniformly,
> but inconsistencies have crept in over the years.  It was just now
> that we noticed them and Glenn volunteered to clean them up.

Inconsistencies in spelling in Emacs manuals and doc strings, i.e. in
text presented to the user, should indeed be fixed.  But fixing
inconsistencies in old ChangeLog entries is IMO a waste of Glenn's
time and energy.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Jason Rumney]

Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     The Burma / Myanmar renaming was understandable as a political statement
>     given the events that were happening at the time. But what exactly have
>     the British done to trigger this?
> 
> Nothing _now_.  Emacs used to use American spellings uniformly,
> but inconsistencies have crept in over the years.  It was just now
> that we noticed them and Glenn volunteered to clean them up.
> 

My understanding has always been that American spellings should be used
in documentation, but comments and ChangeLog entries do not require such
exertion of effort on the part of native English speakers to
deliberately misspell words in the American way.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Miles Bader]

Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:
> My understanding has always been that American spellings should be used
> in documentation, but comments and ChangeLog entries do not require such
> exertion of effort on the part of native English speakers to
> deliberately misspell words in the American way.

Personally I rather _like_ seeing e.g. english spelling in code comments
etc. -- it reflects the author and adds some local flavor, and the
differences are so small that they do not affect readability (even for
non-native speakers).

Changing those things seems more like mindless pedantry and
obsessiveness than useful work.

-Miles

-- 
Cynic, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as
they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a
cynic's eyes to improve his vision.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juri Linkov]

>>     The Burma / Myanmar renaming was understandable as a political statement
>>     given the events that were happening at the time. But what exactly have
>>     the British done to trigger this?
>> 
>> Nothing _now_.  Emacs used to use American spellings uniformly,
>> but inconsistencies have crept in over the years.  It was just now
>> that we noticed them and Glenn volunteered to clean them up.
>
> My understanding has always been that American spellings should be used
> in documentation, but comments and ChangeLog entries do not require such
> exertion of effort on the part of native English speakers to
> deliberately misspell words in the American way.

What about i18n?  Shouldn't commands that display documentation (like
`C-h f', `C-h v', ...) take into account the current locale and translate
default American spellings when the locale is `en_GB'?  This should be much
easier to do than to translate documentation to other languages.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Jason Rumney]

Juri Linkov wrote:

> What about i18n?  Shouldn't commands that display documentation (like
> `C-h f', `C-h v', ...) take into account the current locale and translate
> default American spellings when the locale is `en_GB'?  This should be much
> easier to do than to translate documentation to other languages.

The translation itself might be easier, but it would be less useful than
translating to other languages, as generally English speakers have no
problem reading each others' spelling, even if it looks a little strange
sometimes. The important work is in making such translated documentation
possible. We've done it with the tutorial, and the manuals could be
translated the same way if we had volunteers to take on the rather large
job. We spent some time a while ago discussing ways to localize doc
strings, and I think a reasonable design can be found in that discussion
somewhere, but as is common with such discussions, everyone has an
opinion but noone seems to be interested enough to work on an
implementation.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

    > I propose to fix the spellings of: honour, initialise, neighbour,
    > optimise, recognise.

    What for?

For consistency.  Consistency looks good, both for maintainers
and (when visible to them) to the users.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

> For consistency.  Consistency looks good, both for maintainers
> and (when visible to them) to the users.

Once you quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson's "A foolish consistency is the
hobgoblin of little minds" in this list, and (no offense intended) it
seems appropriate now.

Also, I agree with Miles: differences in spelling (in comments and
ChangeLog entries) add flavo[u]r. Much better that fixing "initialise"
in ChangeLog entries would be to fix bad grammar (there's a lot, and I
know it firsthand because I've perpetrated a few instances myself),
check for missing entries (there are a lot of these), duplicate
entries, non-monotonic times (days or weeks apart, not just arising
from time-zone differences), lots and lots of cases of using
"wildcards" to refer to several variables (which is against our
ChangeLog policies, AFAICS), etc. etc.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Reiner Steib]

On Sun, Jun 29 2008, Juanma Barranquero wrote:

> Richard Stallman wrote:
>> For consistency.  Consistency looks good, both for maintainers
>> and (when visible to them) to the users.

I don't care much about this issue, but when looking for a ChangeLog
entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
variant.

> Also, I agree with Miles: differences in spelling (in comments and
> ChangeLog entries) add flavo[u]r. 

I'd guess it is much easier to unify the spelling globally than to
check if the location is user visible or not (comment vs. doc string,
etc.).

> Much better that fixing "initialise" in ChangeLog entries would be
> to fix bad grammar (there's a lot, and I know it firsthand because
> I've perpetrated a few instances myself), check for missing entries
> (there are a lot of these), duplicate entries, non-monotonic times
> (days or weeks apart, not just arising from time-zone differences),
> lots and lots of cases of using "wildcards" to refer to several
> variables (which is against our ChangeLog policies, AFAICS),
> etc. etc.

In contrast to s/initialise/initialize/g, this can't be done
automatically.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 13:06, Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc> wrote:

> but when looking for a ChangeLog
> entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
> variant.

That's evidently true, though I don't think I've ever done much
searching for comments, and only rarely for ChangeLog descriptions (as
opposed to files, variables and functions).

> I'd guess it is much easier to unify the spelling globally than to
> check if the location is user visible or not (comment vs. doc string,
> etc.).

Well, I don't agree (and I've done my quote of typo-fixing). For
starters, fixing typos in docstrings requires adding a ChangeLog
entry, while comment changes do not.

> In contrast to s/initialise/initialize/g, this can't be done
> automatically.

That would make these kinds of changes all the more valuable, then.
But anyway, no typo-fixing can be done automatically. There are
variables and functions with wrong spellings, for example.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc>
> Cc: rms@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>         emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:06:42 +0200
> 
> On Sun, Jun 29 2008, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> 
> > Richard Stallman wrote:
> >> For consistency.  Consistency looks good, both for maintainers
> >> and (when visible to them) to the users.
> 
> I don't care much about this issue, but when looking for a ChangeLog
> entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
> variant.

Do you really search ChangeLog files for common words like color and
flavor?

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Sam Steingold]

> * Eli Zaretskii <ryvm@tah.bet> [2008-06-29 21:02:23 +0300]:
>
>> From: Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc>
>> Cc: rms@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>>         emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:06:42 +0200
>> 
>> On Sun, Jun 29 2008, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
>> 
>> > Richard Stallman wrote:
>> >> For consistency.  Consistency looks good, both for maintainers
>> >> and (when visible to them) to the users.
>> 
>> I don't care much about this issue, but when looking for a ChangeLog
>> entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
>> variant.
>
> Do you really search ChangeLog files for common words like color and
> flavor?

As a part of a complex regexp, sometimes.

More generally, I would like to offer my 2 kopecks on the issue.

Most people on this list are probably either native English speakers or
quite proficient with it, so this matter might seem unimportant to them.
However, not everyone in the world is, and the number of people with
poor English trying to read Emacs sources, including ChangeLogs and
comments, will only increase with time.
Believe it or not, good grammar is absolutely crucial to understanding
even a simple sentence (you need to study a foreign language as an adult
to truly appreciate this observation - however trivial it might seem to
a linguist), and consistent spelling would help a beginner a lot.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on Fedora release 9 (Sulphur)
http://pmw.org.il http://honestreporting.com http://israelunderattack.slide.com
http://camera.org http://jihadwatch.org http://ffii.org http://truepeace.org
Hard work has a future payoff.  Laziness pays off NOW.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Sam Steingold wrote:
> Believe it or not, good grammar is absolutely crucial to understanding
> even a simple sentence (you need to study a foreign language as an adult
> to truly appreciate this observation - however trivial it might seem to
> a linguist), and consistent spelling would help a beginner a lot.

At least for me I think grammar is much more important than those small 
differences we are speaking about here. Of course for searching the 
spelling plays a bigger role.

Did I tell about this list of the 1721 words we are talking about:

   http://www.tysto.com/articles05/q1/20050324uk-us.shtml

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sam Steingold <sds@gnu.org>
> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:53:11 -0400
> 
> >> I don't care much about this issue, but when looking for a ChangeLog
> >> entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
> >> variant.
> >
> > Do you really search ChangeLog files for common words like color and
> > flavor?
> 
> As a part of a complex regexp, sometimes.

A complex regexp can catch both flavor and flavour without any
trouble.

> Believe it or not, good grammar is absolutely crucial to understanding
> even a simple sentence (you need to study a foreign language as an adult
> to truly appreciate this observation - however trivial it might seem to
> a linguist), and consistent spelling would help a beginner a lot.

Then I propose that we freeze development for a month and announce a
``Emacs consistent spelling month''.  If we cannot spell right, we
shall not be allowed to program, either, because chances are, we will
not be able to read our own code.  Heck, let's add a FOR-RELEASE item
to spell every file in the distro before each release.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Sam Steingold <sds@gnu.org>
>> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:53:11 -0400
>> 
>> >> I don't care much about this issue, but when looking for a ChangeLog
>> >> entry or a comment, it is easier to search only for a single spelling
>> >> variant.
>> >
>> > Do you really search ChangeLog files for common words like color and
>> > flavor?
>> 
>> As a part of a complex regexp, sometimes.
>
> A complex regexp can catch both flavor and flavour without any
> trouble.

If the user has the linguistic experience to be aware of the
availability of both spelling variants.  We should not take this for
granted.  If we have consistent spelling, the user will notice that he
does not find _anything_ rather than a random subset.  This will much
more likely cause him to try searching with a variant spelling.

If you get no hits, you are more likely to reconsider rather than if you
get just half the possible hits.

Really, this variation does not help anybody.  If somebody wants to
invest the time to clean this up and convert to reasonably conservative
American spelling (I don't care for "nite" instead of "night", for
example), then I don't think we should discourage it.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

    Once you quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson's "A foolish consistency is the
    hobgoblin of little minds" in this list, and (no offense intended) it
    seems appropriate now.

Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?

Often it is a mistake to sacrifice something else for consistency.
But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
this way, why argue?

    in ChangeLog entries would be to fix bad grammar (there's a lot, and I
    know it firsthand because I've perpetrated a few instances myself),
    check for missing entries (there are a lot of these), duplicate
    entries, non-monotonic times (days or weeks apart, not just arising
    from time-zone differences), lots and lots of cases of using
    "wildcards" to refer to several variables (which is against our
    ChangeLog policies, AFAICS), etc. etc.

Please fix them if you can.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:05, Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?

Well, now that you mention it...

> But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
> this way, why argue?

Fair enough. My comments are only because I think some of the authors
of the entries would want their linguistic flavour preserved. It is
akin to making a pass and removing the lighthearted or ironic comments
(and there are quite a few of them).

> Please fix them if you can.

I do, every now and them.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:26, Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com> wrote:

> I do, every now and them.

Funny, given the thread. s/m/n/, of course.

   Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:05, Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?
>
> Well, now that you mention it...
>
>> But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
>> this way, why argue?
>
> Fair enough. My comments are only because I think some of the authors
> of the entries would want their linguistic flavour preserved.

Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list when
they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.

There is no need to invent hypothetical people to complicate things.

> It is akin to making a pass and removing the lighthearted or ironic
> comments (and there are quite a few of them).

No, it isn't.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list when
> they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.
>
> There is no need to invent hypothetical people to complicate things.

They have done, at least two of them; if you count me in, that's at
least three. So there's nothing "hypothetical" here. And, perhaps this
escaped you, but I'm not "speaking up" for them, I'm agreeing with
them.

> No, it isn't.

Yes, it is. [Shall we continue...?]

  Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list when
>> they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
>> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.
>>
>> There is no need to invent hypothetical people to complicate things.
>
> They have done, at least two of them; if you count me in, that's at
> least three.

I have seen no author state "Please don't change UK spellings in my
contributions to US spellings".  I have only seen general statements
of the sort "some authors might like...".

If we have authors in here, it would be helpful if they did not hide
between general statements, but explain clearly why they themselves, for
their own contributions, would prefer not to have them changed to make
them consistent with the rest of Emacs.

Maybe I am dense, but all I have seen up to now were _suggestions_ about
what _might_ make people prefer to have their DOC strings stay the way
they are.

The downside is there: it makes it harder to find stuff.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:16, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

> Maybe I am dense, but all I have seen up to now were _suggestions_ about
> what _might_ make people prefer to have their DOC strings stay the way
> they are.

Very curious, because in the conversation I was, DOC strings were
entirely left out. It was all about source code comments and ChangeLog
entries.

  Juanma

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> Morning, David and everybody else!
>
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25:22AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list
>> when they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
>> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.
>
> So I can.  British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined
> and cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar
> Americanisms, that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the
> latter.  I mean, "color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't
> it?

You mean "collar".  You should exhibit a better grasp of spelling if you
want to make a convincing point.

Anyway, the point is that Emacs _has_ chosen a language for its
documentation.  It would be out of place if I commented my contributions
in German, so why should others document in British?  We also have
coding conventions we retain.

> And surely if the Americans had had the moral character to retain
> proper spelling, they wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and
> indiscriminately kidnapped several hundred men, detained them
> unlawfully in Cuba for many years and tortured them.  Although this is
> intuitively obvious, it's a little difficult to demonstrate
> scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the prejudices of my upbringing,
> though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)
>
> So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone
> in my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else
> wants to "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.  There's
> more pressing things to worry about.

The problem is that ChangeLog entries can become NEWS eventually, and
comments become DOC strings.  And all are things people tend to grep
for.  And yes, this thread has been about "anybody else" wanting to
correct things, not about rejecting contributions or tying down
resources people want to spend elsewhere.

> In a way, it's a bit like rigorously (no asides here, please!)
> enforcing a particular way of laying out C code; lots of coding shops
> in the proprietary world try (mostly half-heartedly) to do this, and
> most hackers just ignore the silly rules.  Following them would wipe
> out useful information about who wrote what.

We have Elisp coding conventions in Emacs, and C coding conventions, and
yes, adhering to them is strongly desired.  Nobody complained about that
as far as I remember.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Morning, David and everybody else!

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25:22AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:05, Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> >> Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?

> > Well, now that you mention it...

> >> But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
> >> this way, why argue?

> > Fair enough. My comments are only because I think some of the authors
> > of the entries would want their linguistic flavour preserved.

> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list
> when they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.

So I can.  British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined and
cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar Americanisms,
that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the latter.  I mean,
"color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't it?  And surely if
the Americans had had the moral character to retain proper spelling, they
wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and indiscriminately kidnapped
several hundred men, detained them unlawfully in Cuba for many years and
tortured them.  Although this is intuitively obvious, it's a little
difficult to demonstrate scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the
prejudices of my upbringing, though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)

So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
"correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.  There's more pressing
things to worry about.

> There is no need to invent hypothetical people to complicate things.

Indeed not, when hypothetical people actually exist and are complicating
things quite enough as it is.

> > It is akin to making a pass and removing the lighthearted or ironic
> > comments (and there are quite a few of them).

> No, it isn't.

I think it is.

In a way, it's a bit like rigorously (no asides here, please!) enforcing
a particular way of laying out C code; lots of coding shops in the
proprietary world try (mostly half-heartedly) to do this, and most
hackers just ignore the silly rules.  Following them would wipe out
useful information about who wrote what. 

> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Nick Roberts]

 > > So I can.  British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined
 > > and cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar
 > > Americanisms, that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the
 > > latter.  I mean, "color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't
 > > it?
 > 
 > You mean "collar".  You should exhibit a better grasp of spelling if you
 > want to make a convincing point.

Lighten up, it's a joke.  In UK English red is a "colour", so naturally
one then starts to wonder what "color" means.  It made me smile anyway.
 
 > Anyway, the point is that Emacs _has_ chosen a language for its
 > documentation.  It would be out of place if I commented my contributions
 > in German, so why should others document in British?

Because British and American are almost the same language while German is
completely different?

Oops, sorry I seem to be in the wrong mailing list.

Emacs, anyone?

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, David and everybody else!

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:42:55AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

[ .... ]

> Anyway, the point is that Emacs _has_ chosen a language for its
> documentation.  It would be out of place if I commented my
> contributions in German, so why should others document in British?  We
> also have coding conventions we retain.

Well, I believe German was considered at one point, but with a right
margin (now) of only 65 in doc strings, that would exclude too many
words for German to be practical.

[ .... ]

> > So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left
> > alone in my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody
> > else wants to "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.
> > There's more pressing things to worry about.

> The problem is that ChangeLog entries can become NEWS eventually, and
> comments become DOC strings.  And all are things people tend to grep
> for.  And yes, this thread has been about "anybody else" wanting to
> correct things, not about rejecting contributions or tying down
> resources people want to spend elsewhere.

Sorry, just to clarify, I meant that there're more pressing things for
_me_ to worry about than moaning about my comments/ChangeLog entries
being changed.  So if somebody does it, I won't moan, I won't even feel
resentful.

> > In a way, it's a bit like rigorously (no asides here, please!)
> > enforcing a particular way of laying out C code; lots of coding shops
> > in the proprietary world try (mostly half-heartedly) to do this, and
> > most hackers just ignore the silly rules.  Following them would wipe
> > out useful information about who wrote what.

> We have Elisp coding conventions in Emacs, and C coding conventions, and
> yes, adhering to them is strongly desired.  Nobody complained about that
> as far as I remember.

Well, the GNU coding standards, unlike most ones in the "real world", are
sensible, and GNU provides a way of adhering to them without effort (at
least, without effort apart from mine).

> -- 
> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Hi, Kenichi,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
> 
>> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
>> is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
>> replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
>> put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
>> cancel/undo, etc.) :-p
> 
> NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
> delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later put
> it back again.
> 
> You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but you'd
> replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs hacker to
> change a light bulb).
> 
> And so on.
> 
> There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
> the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other languages.  Let us
> strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and to preserve and retain
> the fine control this gives us over our meanings.

That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to 
have a document describing those small differences.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

"Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:

> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> Hi, Kenichi,
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
>>> is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
>>> replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
>>> put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
>>> cancel/undo, etc.) :-p
>>
>> NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
>> delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later put
>> it back again.
>>
>> You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but you'd
>> replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs hacker to
>> change a light bulb).
>>
>> And so on.
>>
>> There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
>> the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other languages.  Let us
>> strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and to preserve and retain
>> the fine control this gives us over our meanings.
>
> That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to
> have a document describing those small differences.

Uh no, it is not nice.  The poetry of Emacs is at a different level than
the poetry of drama.  The language of documentation should be blunt and
to the point.  We don't want to hide differences in the subtlety of
words.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, Kenichi,

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:

> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
> is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
> replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
> put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
> cancel/undo, etc.) :-p

NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later put
it back again.

You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but you'd
replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs hacker to
change a light bulb).

And so on.

There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other languages.  Let us
strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and to preserve and retain
the fine control this gives us over our meanings.

> Kenichi Handa

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

David Kastrup wrote:
> "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> Hi, Kenichi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
>>>> is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
>>>> replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
>>>> put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
>>>> cancel/undo, etc.) :-p
>>> NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
>>> delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later put
>>> it back again.
>>>
>>> You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but you'd
>>> replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs hacker to
>>> change a light bulb).
>>>
>>> And so on.
>>>
>>> There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
>>> the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other languages.  Let us
>>> strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and to preserve and retain
>>> the fine control this gives us over our meanings.
>> That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to
>> have a document describing those small differences.
> 
> Uh no, it is not nice.  The poetry of Emacs is at a different level than
> the poetry of drama.  The language of documentation should be blunt and
> to the point.  We don't want to hide differences in the subtlety of
> words.

Maybe you are right, but I think different words can both hide and point 
to the differences. For me personally it would help. I do not think that 
logically, it takes too much time except at that point when you have to 
be exact.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, Lennart!

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 03:33:35PM +0200, Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> >Hi, Kenichi,

> >On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:

> >>Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
> >>is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
> >>replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
> >>put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
> >>cancel/undo, etc.) :-p

> >NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
> >delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later
> >put it back again.

> >You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but
> >you'd replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs
> >hacker to change a light bulb).

> >And so on.

> >There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means
> >exactly the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other
> >languages.  Let us strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and
> >to preserve and retain the fine control this gives us over our
> >meanings.

> That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to
> have a document describing those small differences.

It would be for many native English speakers, too, particularly for
politicians and bureaucrats.  Sadly, there isn't one, at least, not a
comprehensive one.  If you're interested enough, find a copy of "Fowler's
Modern English Usage", preferably the second or first edition.  It's a
classic.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

    At least for me I think grammar is much more important than those small 
    differences we are speaking about here.

You may be right, but instead of arguing which is more important to
fix, how about if you help by fixing the one you think is more
important to fix?

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Johan Bockgård]

"Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:

> That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to
> have a document describing those small differences.

I have the Cassell Guide to Related Words (~650 pages).

-- 
Johan Bockgård

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

bojohan+news@dd.chalmers.se (Johan Bockgård) writes:

> "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> That is nice. For some non native English speakers it would be good to
>> have a document describing those small differences.
>
> I have the Cassell Guide to Related Words (~650 pages).

Having just googled for the recently late "George Carlin", I read about
his list and standup show of "Seven Dirty Words", later expanded to a
list of over 200.  I had a short double take upon reading the above.

The internet equivalent of channel zapping is fraught with dangers.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:49:07 +0000
> Cc: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>, rgm@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org,
>   rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
> my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
> "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.

Who is Greg?

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David De La Harpe Golden]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
> the same as the other.


The real problem with american vs. british english is the words with
the same spelling in both that are likely to be used to mean different
things...

"color" and "colour" both mean the same thing and will usually be
understood on either side of the atlantic.  "roundabout", "momentarily",
"liberal", "pound sign" etc. are the tricky ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_words_having_different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English

Bah. I speak hiberno-english anyway.

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <20080630134328.GC2910@muc.de>, Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> Hi, Kenichi,
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:16:25PM +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:

> > Anyway, for me (a non native English speeker), the more helpful thing
> > is to standardise which word to use (e.g. remove/delete,
> > replace/substitute, accept/permit/allow, preserve/retain,
> > put/set/store, property/attribute, vector/array, go-to/move-to,
> > cancel/undo, etc.) :-p

> NO!!  Different words have different meanings.  For example, if you
> delete something, it's gone.  If you remove something, you can later put
> it back again.

It seems that Emacs doesn't use delete and remove in such a
way; deleted text by delete-region can be yanked, and the
docstring of remove-alist starts as:
             ^^^^^^
Delete an element whose car equals key from the alist bound to symbol.
^^^^^^

> You might substitute a fresh football player for a tired one, but you'd
> replace a broken light bulb (answer, it only takes one Emacs hacker to
> change a light bulb).

The docstring of substitute-key-definition starts as:
                 ^^^^^^^^^^
Replace olddef with newdef for any keys in keymap now defined as olddef.
^^^^^^^

> There a few pairs of words indeed in English in which one means exactly
> the same as the other.  It is surely the same in other languages.  Let us
> strive, always, to use the most fitting word, and to preserve and retain
> the fine control this gives us over our meanings.

I understand that there are cases that only one of those
paired words are suitable.  What helps non-native English
speakers is a guideline of when to use which word.  As we
are applying words to programing codes, normal dictionaries
don't help much in such a case (e.g. the above cases).

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Johannes Weiner]

Hi,

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> Morning, David and everybody else!
>
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25:22AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:05, Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> >> Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?
>
>> > Well, now that you mention it...
>
>> >> But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
>> >> this way, why argue?
>
>> > Fair enough. My comments are only because I think some of the authors
>> > of the entries would want their linguistic flavour preserved.
>
>> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list
>> when they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
>> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.
>
> So I can.  British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined and
> cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar Americanisms,
> that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the latter.  I mean,
> "color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't it?  And surely if
> the Americans had had the moral character to retain proper spelling, they
> wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and indiscriminately kidnapped
> several hundred men, detained them unlawfully in Cuba for many years and
> tortured them.  Although this is intuitively obvious, it's a little
> difficult to demonstrate scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the
> prejudices of my upbringing, though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)

> -- 
> Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

While we are discussing vulgarism, it is called ,,Nürnberg'' ;)

	Hannes

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Richard M Stallman]

    > So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
    > my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
    > "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.

    Who is Greg?

Maybe "Greg" is the British spelling of "Glenn" ;-).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[David Kastrup]

Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     > So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
>     > my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
>     > "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.
>
>     Who is Greg?
>
> Maybe "Greg" is the British spelling of "Glenn" ;-).

What an eglenniously bad joke.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, Eli,

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:02:21PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:49:07 +0000
> > Cc: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>, rgm@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org,
> >   rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>

> > So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
> > my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
> > "correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.

> Who is Greg?

Er, my sluggish brain's mismemory of Glenn's name.

Sorry, Glenn.  No offence was intended.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie]

'n Tag, Johannes!

On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 09:36:55AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hi,

> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> > British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined and
> > cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar
> > Americanisms, that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the
> > latter.  I mean, "color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't
> > it?  And surely if the Americans had had the moral character to
> > retain proper spelling, they wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and
> > indiscriminately kidnapped several hundred men, detained them
> > unlawfully in Cuba for many years and tortured them.  Although this
> > is intuitively obvious, it's a little difficult to demonstrate
> > scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the prejudices of my upbringing,
> > though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)

> While we are discussing vulgarism, it is called ,,Nürnberg'' ;)

It is, indeed.  Trouble is, and I can't be Frank enough here, native
English speakers can't pronounce Nürnberg properly.  Even I can't manage
it, though I've lived here for some while.  Fürth is even more
troublesome.

Still, it could be worse.  I've seen "Nuremburg" in print.  Funny,
though, because the castle here is far more prominent than any mountain.

> 	Hannes

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nürnberg, Franken).

Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Johannes Weiner]

Hi,

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> 'n Tag, Johannes!
>
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 09:36:55AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>
>> > British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined and
>> > cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar
>> > Americanisms, that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the
>> > latter.  I mean, "color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't
>> > it?  And surely if the Americans had had the moral character to
>> > retain proper spelling, they wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and
>> > indiscriminately kidnapped several hundred men, detained them
>> > unlawfully in Cuba for many years and tortured them.  Although this
>> > is intuitively obvious, it's a little difficult to demonstrate
>> > scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the prejudices of my upbringing,
>> > though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)
>
>> While we are discussing vulgarism, it is called ,,Nürnberg'' ;)
>
> It is, indeed.  Trouble is, and I can't be Frank enough here, native
> English speakers can't pronounce Nürnberg properly.  Even I can't manage
> it, though I've lived here for some while.  Fürth is even more
> troublesome.

Something like `nurn-bairk'?  And `furrd' (with a very short ur and with
an `r' that does not sound like a mouth full of chewing gum).

HTH, but I figure people already tried to teach you ;)

> Still, it could be worse.  I've seen "Nuremburg" in print.  Funny,
> though, because the castle here is far more prominent than any
> mountain.

Ouch!  But this is completely due to your pronunciation.  There is an
audible difference between `burg' and `berg' (in German) you can even
make out through the worst mobile-phone connection while standing next
to a starting jet engine.

`boork' vs. `bairk' or something.

	Hannes