Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages? (was: "[commit] symfile.c (simple_overlay_update): Check for null return.")

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On Monday, March 07, 2011 05:51:58 Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Just a suggestion. It's really a detail, and I won't push for us
> 
> to adopt this suggestion, but:
> > +	if (minsym == NULL)
> > +	  error (_("Error reading inferior's overlay table: couldn't "
> > +		   "find `_ovly_table' array\n"
> > +		   "in inferior.  Use `overlay manual' mode."));
> 
> I'm not very fond of contractions in error messages (or any message
> printed by GDB). I know there is plenty of "prior art" of our use
> of contractions in the output, but I just think it looks better to
> spell words completely.

personally, i think contractions are fine when used correctly.  while i am a 
lazy english speaker, "should not" makes it sound like a formal statement.  i 
also just watched a hindi movie where the subtitles were kind of bad, but for 
the opposite reason ... they used contractions everywhere even when native 
speakers wouldn't (because it sounds weird).

what about "cannot" vs "can not" ?  obviously "can't" is out via this new 
rule, but i don't see a problem with "cannot" ...

i think some people read "maybe" as a contraction of "may be", but i see a 
subtle difference between them.

> For the future, can we agree on avoiding contractions?

in order to make it stick, it really needs to be a rule that the autoscanning 
script checks for (similar to style issues).
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.