Thread

1. Cannot

   David Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> — 2011-10-26T18:16:02Z

   Suggested doc “patch”:
   
       grep -lri 'can not' doc | xargs perl -i -pe 's/can not/cannot/g'
   
   Best,
   
   David
   
   
   

2. Re: Cannot

   Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2011-10-26T21:06:12Z

   
   On 10/26/2011 02:16 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
   > Suggested doc “patch”:
   >
   >      grep -lri 'can not' doc | xargs perl -i -pe 's/can not/cannot/g'
   >
   >
   
   Why? "can not" is perfectly grammatical AFAIK.
   
   cheers
   
   andrew
   
   

3. Re: Cannot

   David Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> — 2011-10-26T21:15:30Z

   On Oct 26, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
   
   >> Suggested doc “patch”:
   >> 
   >>     grep -lri 'can not' doc | xargs perl -i -pe 's/can not/cannot/g'
   > 
   > Why? "can not" is perfectly grammatical AFAIK.
   
   True, but there's a logic issue. Take this example from doc/src/sgml/func.sgml:
   
   >    <para>
   >      <function>pg_advisory_xact_lock</> works the same as
   >      <function>pg_advisory_lock</>, expect the lock is automatically released
   >      at the end of the current transaction and can not be released explicitly.
   >     </para>
   
   I read this as equivalent to "can be not released." Which of course is silly, so as I read it I realize what it means, but it trips up my overly logical brain. It interrupts the flow. There is no such confusion in "cannot be released" and thus no tripping up on meaning.
   
   Best,
   
   David
   

4. Re: Cannot

   Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2011-10-26T21:20:48Z

   
   On 10/26/2011 05:15 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
   > On Oct 26, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
   >
   >>> Suggested doc “patch”:
   >>>
   >>>      grep -lri 'can not' doc | xargs perl -i -pe 's/can not/cannot/g'
   >> Why? "can not" is perfectly grammatical AFAIK.
   > True, but there's a logic issue. Take this example from doc/src/sgml/func.sgml:
   >
   >>     <para>
   >>       <function>pg_advisory_xact_lock</>  works the same as
   >>       <function>pg_advisory_lock</>, expect the lock is automatically released
   >>       at the end of the current transaction and can not be released explicitly.
   >>      </para>
   > I read this as equivalent to "can be not released." Which of course is silly, so as I read it I realize what it means, but it trips up my overly logical brain. It interrupts the flow. There is no such confusion in "cannot be released" and thus no tripping up on meaning.
   >
   >
   
   Here's what I would do:
   
   1. s/expect/except that/
   
   2. s/can not be released explicitly/can not be explicitly released/
   
   cheers
   
   andrew
   
   
   

5. Re: Cannot

   Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2011-10-26T21:58:28Z

   "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
   > On Oct 26, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
   >> Why? "can not" is perfectly grammatical AFAIK.
   
   > True, but there's a logic issue. Take this example from doc/src/sgml/func.sgml:
   
   >> <para>
   >> <function>pg_advisory_xact_lock</> works the same as
   >> <function>pg_advisory_lock</>, expect the lock is automatically released
   >> at the end of the current transaction and can not be released explicitly.
   >> </para>
   
   > I read this as equivalent to "can be not released." Which of course is silly, so as I read it I realize what it means, but it trips up my overly logical brain. It interrupts the flow. There is no such confusion in "cannot be released" and thus no tripping up on meaning.
   
   This particular change seems like an improvement to me, but it's hardly
   an adequate argument for a global search-and-replace.  There might be
   other places where such a change renders things *less* readable.
   
   			regards, tom lane
   
   

6. Re: Cannot

   David Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> — 2011-10-26T22:05:08Z

   On Oct 26, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
   
   >> I read this as equivalent to "can be not released." Which of course is silly, so as I read it I realize what it means, but it trips up my overly logical brain. It interrupts the flow. There is no such confusion in "cannot be released" and thus no tripping up on meaning.
   > 
   > This particular change seems like an improvement to me, but it's hardly
   > an adequate argument for a global search-and-replace.  There might be
   > other places where such a change renders things *less* readable.
   
   The patch is actually quite modest; there are only a few instances of "can not". Attached.
   
   Best,
   
   David