Обсуждение: Typo

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/history.html
Description:

Hi Folks, thank you for maintaining this great technical resource, which
I've only recently started to use.

There appears to be a typo, here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/history.html#:~:text=Postgres95%20code%20was%20completely%20ANSI%20C.
A word or two should be added between 'completely' and 'ANSI C', such as
're-written in', or 're-coded using', or some such.

Thanks, Peter Spung | Raleigh, NC, USA

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 08:52:25PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> There appears to be a typo, here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/history.html#:~:text=Postgres95%20code%20was%20completely%20ANSI%20C.
> A word or two should be added between 'completely' and 'ANSI C', such as
> 're-written in', or 're-coded using', or some such.

This is the current sentence, and it sounds kind of OK to me, FWIW:
"Postgres95 code was completely ANSI C and trimmed in size by 25%.
--
Michael

On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 07:32 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 08:52:25PM +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > There appears to be a typo, here:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/history.html#:~:text=Postgres95%20code%20was%20completely%20ANSI%20C.
> > A word or two should be added between 'completely' and 'ANSI C', such as
> > 're-written in', or 're-coded using', or some such.
>
> This is the current sentence, and it sounds kind of OK to me, FWIW:
> "Postgres95 code was completely ANSI C and trimmed in size by 25%.

That uses "ANSI C" as an adjective, which I think is sloppy wording
(even though English is somewhat relaxed about the distinction between
classes of words).

How about: "... was written completely in ANSI C ..."

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 07:32 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> This is the current sentence, and it sounds kind of OK to me, FWIW:
>> "Postgres95 code was completely ANSI C and trimmed in size by 25%.

> That uses "ANSI C" as an adjective, which I think is sloppy wording
> (even though English is somewhat relaxed about the distinction between
> classes of words).

Yeah, it's not great English, but it's not awful English either;
just a rather telegraphic (abbreviated) style.

Here's the thing: at this point, this documentation is itself a
historical artifact.  git excavation dates the current wording to
8baa8fcf4 of 1999-06-21, and that was just a small adjustment of
c8cfb0cea of 1998-03-01, and it seems likely that that was pulled
verbatim from some older source.

So I'm disinclined to change it on grounds of "I think the grammar
is a bit shaky".  It is what it is.

            regards, tom lane

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 07:32 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> This is the current sentence, and it sounds kind of OK to me, FWIW:
>> "Postgres95 code was completely ANSI C and trimmed in size by 25%.

> That uses "ANSI C" as an adjective, which I think is sloppy wording
> (even though English is somewhat relaxed about the distinction between
> classes of words).

Yeah, it's not great English, but it's not awful English either;
just a rather telegraphic (abbreviated) style.

Here's the thing: at this point, this documentation is itself a
historical artifact.  git excavation dates the current wording to
8baa8fcf4 of 1999-06-21, and that was just a small adjustment of
c8cfb0cea of 1998-03-01, and it seems likely that that was pulled
verbatim from some older source.

So I'm disinclined to change it on grounds of "I think the grammar
is a bit shaky".  It is what it is.