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: AS11403 173.228.157.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4755B1F60F for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 01:14:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBCDBA94D; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:14:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=0tp797TmWyw/6hW1VBp3DgA/PWc=; b=FQRC+9 iA3j2jvBIhH5xhvoIr2CECSjiclQeenMttCccJKSY17Se9dmay3I1uRWcI+Ep4YB M8Gg3wgX+i5JCGmCYcEMSsiYgv5zIVTKnnr5QBKJqpIVkw9NriOAfw+2PYy9HgZ3 ZQseXjiC7wyJJa/uQsXtBOx1fNVM2OdDTjfEM= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3EB4BA94B; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:14:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=kyleam.com; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=XFPFcburVBJFENI1i3rm/+O+UlW9ZB+sduS6iz4PkmU=; b=rvxVSRipOqlta/CHaK5mruvZASkJTtRZ0K41a9yIWN9O3XfNNUrARVzszkdDsgu13GIIeHqV76c/u8zPShSkqMQvuR2gTt+bLjVCO/Hj7lKrxbXgIs86149JLOAiazQvR9dvEEty98mGymTzuEvRb3uHa1OhCx8p2yZjenUE048= Received: from localhost (unknown [45.33.91.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B8EC2BA947; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:14:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) From: Kyle Meyer To: Eric Wong Cc: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: add technical/whyperl In-Reply-To: <20200408222607.GA4741@dcvr> References: <20200407094940.14962-1-e@yhbt.net> <871roykdv5.fsf@kyleam.com> <20200408222607.GA4741@dcvr> Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 01:14:22 +0000 Message-ID: <87ftddihox.fsf@kyleam.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 778F566A-79FF-11EA-9111-8D86F504CC47-24757444!pb-smtp21.pobox.com List-Id: Eric Wong writes: > Kyle Meyer wrote: > >> Eric Wong writes: >> >> > +As always, comments and corrections and additions welcome at >> >> s/welcome/are welcome/ ? > > Umm... I guess? Would omitting "are" would only be valid > if there were a single item? > > As always, $FOO welcome at I guess dropping an "is" in the singular case sounds a little better to my ears than dropping "are" in the plural case. I think the original was fine, though. I stumbled on it for whatever reason and would write "are" there myself, but it probably wasn't worth me noting, even if I hid behind a "?" :> > Upon a second read of the original, having "and" twice doesn't > read well to me. So final form should probably be: > > As always, comments, corrections and additions are welcome at Yes, I too would prefer dropping the first "and". >> > + performance and memory use are predictable and does not >> >> s/does/do/ >> >> > + require GC tuning by the user. > > I think "does" reads better, there, but the sentence runs on > for too long. I don't think the GC part needs to be there(*) Hmm, okay. I think I misidentified what the intended subject was there. I took the subject as "performance and memory use", which case there is a tense mismatch (and it sticks out because "are" is used in the previous sentence). And it doesn't matter because it's getting cut :) Thanks for writing up this rationale.