From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: Re: bug#6877: Documentation: "till" vs "until" in docstrings Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:53:21 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87d3tgdo32.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1291820688 17935 80.91.229.12 (8 Dec 2010 15:04:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 15:04:48 +0000 (UTC) To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 08 16:04:45 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PQLZT-0006cd-0I for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:04:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38470 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQLZS-00014j-Fs for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:04:42 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!newsfeed.esat.net!feeder.news.heanet.ie!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.albasani.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.bug Original-Lines: 15 Original-X-Trace: news.albasani.net 5hrjLbxEQZkbDdc/YqEzQFRzZhfdds0GrNosZrNwDb2pvhLfsNW9KBEqH8SVAJqvc/dvHaXwvnZObN7jg7SB+TM4w3pNAEln7UOKpiJBLfI4QLnGW2fvb132sjrCPumd Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@albasani.net Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:53:21 +0000 (UTC) X-User-ID: 6Wl4OO+aE5YT4kj9NosQSZFyrcKpqJSclXRQMt3ToR4= X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Cancel-Lock: sha1:p4H1IO42dYeCpga2dq0w8VtngBA= sha1:0kTRXZD7Ns3jOROvLtZjrcP86NM= User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NNTP-Posting-Host: IDQESej0MUKcAqTRnecJI6eNezmpu2m6V0lCElOjg/c= Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.bug:66937 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:42313 Archived-At: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 00:10:02 -0400 MON KEY wrote: MK> While it is considered reasonable by many[1] to substitute "till" for MK> "until" I don't see this as something to promote in the docs esp. MK> when there is a negligible economy in using of "till" instead of "until": Seconded. I am repeating some of MON KEY's arguments (more concisely, I hope) but "till" is harder to parse (being a less common alternative to "until") and has more meanings in English. Also many programmers are familiar with "until" as a flow control keyword so it's a more natural word for them. Ted