Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 13:10:06 -0800 (PST) From: Ceri Davies <ceri@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/48125: [PATCH] Incorrect errno strings in intro(2) Message-ID: <200302172110.h1HLA62a026929@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/48125; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Ceri Davies <ceri@FreeBSD.org>
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: docs/48125: [PATCH] Incorrect errno strings in intro(2)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 21:01:04 +0000
Adding to audit trail from pending/48348:
Message-Id: <20030216233702.GB37125@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 10:07:02 +1030
From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Per Hedeland <per@hedeland.org>, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org,
FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, Bruce Evans <bde@FreeBSD.org>
On Sunday, 16 February 2003 at 17:43:34 -0500, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 13:30:16 -0800 (PST)
> Per Hedeland <per@hedeland.org> wrote:
>
>> However, regarding the contractions: I can see where you're coming
>> from, since I gather that using them in "formal" documents is frowned
>> upon -
>
> True,
>
>> but I must really strongly disagree with your suggestion to change
>> the code! The output of programs should not be changed for such
>> "frivolous" reasons - e.g. there may well be scripts etc out there
>> that, however unwisely, rely on the exact format of error messages to
>> function correctly. Not to mention that using contractions in error
>> messages is a long-standing Unix tradition, even in cases where the
>> message doesn't originate in sys_errlist.
>
> however to my knowledge when Bell Labs originally started producing
> UNIX the code was actually changed to match the documentation in
> many instances. People with more knowledge of UNIX history would be
> better to ask about that, though. I just remember reading something
> like that, Bruce Evans (bde) or Greg Lehey (grog) come to mind as
> the correct people to ask.
This seems unlikely. The same people wrote the code and the docco;
it's unlikely that changes in the docco would make it out of sync with
the code base. It's possible, of course, that they occasionally wrote
docco changes first with the intention to change the code, and then
did it, but I don't suppose that's what you're talking about.
>> I'd suggest that either you consider these strings to not be part of
>> the actual "document text" (which would be correct I think), and
>> thereby exempt from considerations of "good writing style" - or if
>> that isn't acceptable, leave the "Cannot"s in the man page and the
>> "Can't"s in the code - this discrepancy shouldn't matter *too* much
>> to the reader, who is unlikely to be searching the man page for
>> "Can't" anyway...
>
> To the best of my knowledge, use of contractions is frowned upon in
> FreeBSD. Again, this is an issue to take up with the respected parties.
> I've taken the liberty to cc: them for input. Ideas?
I don't know about the project, but I frown on some contractions and
not others. In general, if the contraction is used in normal speech
("can't") I'd think it's OK. If it isn't ("cont'd"), I'd disagree
with its use.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200302172110.h1HLA62a026929>