Re: [PATCH] invoke.texi: "compile time", "run time" cleanup

[Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>]

On 1/28/2012 12:05 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I'm specifically asking for review of this patch by one of the docs
> maintainers before checking it in, since it seems not everyone agrees
> that these copyediting patches qualify as "obvious".  In this particular
> chunk, I had to make some judgment calls, too.
>
> We usually use "compile time", "link time", and "run time" to refer to
> the times at which the program is compiled, linked, and run,
> respectively.  So, the normal English rules about hyphenation apply
> here; it's correct to say "at run time", but "run-time behavior", for
> example.
>
> To confuse matters, though, "compile time" can also be used as a noun
> meaning "the amount of time it takes to compile".  I saw that in some
> places invoke.texi was already using "compilation time" for this meaning
> instead and decided it made sense to apply that terminology uniformly.
> Likewise "execution time" was already being used in some places for "the
> amount of time it takes the program to run", so I made that usage
> consistent.  Confusingly, there were also a couple of places referring
> to run time of a compilation pass; I reworded those to refer to
> compilation time in that pass.
>
> Finally, "runtime" (without a space or hyphen) is commonly used as a
> noun to refer collectively to the startup code, libraries, trap
> handlers, bootloader or operating system, etc that are present on the
> target at run time.  In the Objective-C section of this document there's
> a lot of existing discussion of the "GNU runtime" versus the "NeXT
> runtime", for example, and other option descriptions refer to the
> "simulator runtime".  Google shows a lot of variation on usage here (and
> Wikipedia, in particular, is quite confused on this topic), but to me it
> seems silly to make the adjective form of "runtime" hyphenated when it's
> already a single word as a noun.  So, I decided to go consistently with
> "runtime support", "runtime library", etc when discussing what the
> runtime includes.
>
> OK to check in?
>
> -Sandra

I am still inclined to go with runtime everywhere, to ease searching and
avoid everyone having to understand the above set of rules, which seem
over-delicate to me (admitting all three forms, with tricky rules as
to which of the three is used, will ensure that people make constant
mistakes).

In particular

runtime support
run-time behavior

seems to tricky a distinction. I am not clear on what the exact rule
that you have in mind here is, and I am absolutely sure that it will
not be practical to expect the community to absorb and follow this rule.

The adjective vs noun rule is one thing, but having a rule that
delicately distinguishes two forms of adjectival use is a step
too far for me.

At the very least, you need to state the rule you have invented
here, rather than just give a few usage based examples.

I also find the disctinction between compile time and compilation
time tricky to expect to be used consistently, although it is a
useful distinction if

a) enforced carefully
b) documented in a glossary

whereas the distinction between the two adjectival forms
runtime and run-time seems to have no technical value.