From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: English usage bug in bytecomp.el Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 10:49:50 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1110364900 10679 80.91.229.2 (9 Mar 2005 10:41:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 10:41:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, snogglethorpe@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 11:41:40 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D8ydA-000308-6e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:41:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D8yro-0001JM-Qx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:56:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D8yGT-0000uS-Mg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:18:06 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D8yGQ-0000tj-PO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:18:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D8yGQ-0000h5-5l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:18:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D8xpJ-0007ac-MH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 04:50:01 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D8xpB-0000Fw-KI; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 04:49:54 -0500 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:12:59 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34362 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34362 Richard Stallman writes: > However, a variant which might be even clearer, and maybe less > objectionable would be > > How about "FOO is an obsolete function (now and since 21.4)". That sounds weird when encountered in the 21.4 release, so one would need to edit this _again_ after 21.4 has been released (do a s/21\.4/22.1/g on this posting so that it makes sense). And actually, it still contains the same grammatical offender, only masked in alternatives. > Or "FOO is an obsolete function (marked obsolete in Emacs 21.4)". "FOO is an obsolete function and has been obsolete since 21.4." Uh, same problem as with your initial proposal: sounds weird in 21.4 itself. How about: "FOO is an obsolete function in version 21.4 and later." -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum