From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32050 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2011 18:56:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 32037 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2011 18:56:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:55:57 +0000 Received: from mailhost2.vmware.com (mailhost2.vmware.com [10.16.67.167]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F5B40005; Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:55:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138]) by mailhost2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328368ED83; Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:55:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D752A3B.6090603@vmware.com> Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:07:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages? References: <4D718A22.3020302@vmware.com> <20110307105158.GZ30306@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20110307105158.GZ30306@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00480.txt.bz2 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. For the future, can we agree on avoiding > contractions? > My $0.02 -- I don't think there's anything wrong with contractions. They're a part of standard English.