This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] doc/*.texi: Fix typos and follow spelling conventions.
- From: Ziemowit Laski <zlaski at apple dot com>
- To: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:59:09 -0800
- Subject: Re: [patch] doc/*.texi: Fix typos and follow spelling conventions.
On Tuesday, Dec 17, 2002, at 16:24 US/Pacific, Matt Austern wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 04:20 PM, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
On Tuesday, Dec 17, 2002, at 15:27 US/Pacific, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
I'm not sure which document you're referring to and so can't comment
specifically. But yes, I would definitely consider standards
documents
containing intentional malapropisms to be unprofessional. :-)
Do you also disapprove of limericks in (released, not draft)
standards?
Not sure what you mean...
Look up 'immolation, self' in the index of the C++ Standard,
ISO/IEC 14882:1998(E). Or, of course, just read clause 14.7.3,
paragraph 7.
I assume you're referring to the following side-splitting passage?
When writing a specialization, be careful about its location; or to
make it compile
will be such a trial as to kindle its self-immolation.
So, after reaching the end of this literary tour de force (I'm
referring to
Paragraph 7 in its entirety) and looking up "immolation" in my pocket
English-Polish dictionary, I tentatively decide that this probably must
be an attempt at humor. But now, another question arises: what is the
scope of the humor operator? Specifically, do I still need to be
careful
about the location of my specialization? And if I am, what should I be
looking out for, self-immolation having been brilliantly ruled out?
So, yes, putting jokes in standards documents is really, really bad
idea.
It is bound to confuse readers, especially those who did not attend a
boys' boarding school in Blytheshire-upon-Thump.
It's not the only inside joke in that standard, for that matter.
But how can one possibly improve on the comic mastery achieved above?
Oh, wait, I just figured out by what you meant by "in that standard".
Never mind...
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ziemowit Laski 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2K
Mac OS X Compiler Group Cupertino, CA USA 95014-2083
Apple Computer, Inc. +1.408.974.6229 Fax .5477