From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12264 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2011 11:24:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 12256 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2011 11:24:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:24:14 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PwYXs-0000IB-Dl; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 06:24:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:30:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20110307105158.GZ30306@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Mon, 7 Mar 2011 14:51:58 +0400) Subject: Re: can we avoid using contractions in GDB messages? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4D718A22.3020302@vmware.com> <20110307105158.GZ30306@adacore.com> 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/msg00450.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 14:51:58 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > > > + 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? You mean, use "could not" instead of "couldn't"? Why is that an issue?