From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F901F4B4 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 23:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236259AbhDFXCB (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2021 19:02:01 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:43018 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232398AbhDFXCA (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2021 19:02:00 -0400 Received: (qmail 9674 invoked by uid 109); 6 Apr 2021 23:01:52 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Apr 2021 23:01:52 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 1085 invoked by uid 111); 6 Apr 2021 23:01:52 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 06 Apr 2021 19:01:52 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 19:01:51 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Varun Varada Cc: Michal =?utf-8?B?U3VjaMOhbmVr?= , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: replace jargon word "impact" with "effect"/"affect" Message-ID: References: <20210406092440.GZ6564@kitsune.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 02:36:27PM -0500, Varun Varada wrote: > > while using "will not impact" in an incorrect or unclear way may be a > > problem the word "impact" in itself is not "jargon". > > The word means "to have a strong or marked effect on" (v.) and "a > strong or market influence" (n.) when used figuratively; it is not > synonymous with "affect" and "effect", respectively, as shown even by > all of the entries you've cited. Using it as such is the incorrect > part, so those are the instances I've changed in the diff. Er, is that true? From Michal's definitions: > > From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 : > [...] > > 2. To affect or influence, especially in a significant or It literally uses "affect" to define it. The "especially significant" does not apply to many, but I don't think that makes it necessarily wrong to use impact to mean "affect". Likewise: > > From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) : > [...] > > v 1: press or wedge together; pack together > > 2: have an effect upon; "Will the new rules affect me?" [syn: > > affect, impact, bear upon, bear on, touch on, > > touch] That is likewise listing "impact" and "affect" as synonyms. I do agree the word is over-used in some forms of writing, but I don't find anything at all confusing or wrong about the uses that you changed in your patch. I am a native speaker of English. I'm open to the argument that non-native speakers may be more confused by the word. But this seems like mostly a style preference thing, and I'd generally prefer to leave the contributions and style of the original writers intact unless there is a good reason not to. Such changes are doubly unwanted in cases like this: > --- a/compat/nedmalloc/malloc.c.h > +++ b/compat/nedmalloc/malloc.c.h > @@ -2952,7 +2952,7 @@ static size_t traverse_and_check(mstate m); > #endif /* (FOOTERS && !INSECURE) */ > > > -/* In gcc, use __builtin_expect to minimize impact of checks */ > +/* In gcc, use __builtin_expect to minimize affect of checks */ > #if !INSECURE > #if defined(__GNUC__) && __GNUC__ >= 3 > #define RTCHECK(e) __builtin_expect(e, 1) where the text is imported from another project, and we'd prefer to stay as close to their version as possible (e.g., to avoid unnecessary conflicts when pulling in new versions). Also, this one should be "effect" anyway, as it is a noun. -Peff