On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 5:17 AM Damien Le Moal
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 3/23/22 16:24, Diego Viola wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:53 AM Damien Le Moal
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/23/22 14:52, Diego Viola wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:45 AM Damien Le Moal
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/23/22 14:40, Diego Viola wrote:
> >>>>> Use the contraction "it's" instead of the possessive form "its".
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, while at it, let's use proper formal written English, so:
> >>>> s/it's/it is
> >>>> s/isn't/is not
> >>>
> >>> Fine with me, do you want me to send you another patch with those changes?
> >>
> >> Yes please.
> >
> > I sent a v2 patch changing those things you pointed out, however, the
> > whole comment[0] looks informal "But wait.. there's more" and I don't
> > think replacing "it's" with "it is" achieves a lot in this case.
>
> :)
>
> Indeed. Do you want it in or can I drop it ?
Given that the language is mostly informal, I'd rather see the first
patch applied (if that is OK with you). However, I agree with you that
it would be nice to see formal language used, I just don't think I'm
the right person to change all the comments in that file. :(
Thanks,
Diego
On 3/23/22 17:44, Diego Viola wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 5:17 AM Damien Le Moal
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/23/22 16:24, Diego Viola wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:53 AM Damien Le Moal
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/23/22 14:52, Diego Viola wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:45 AM Damien Le Moal
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/23/22 14:40, Diego Viola wrote:
>>>>>>> Use the contraction "it's" instead of the possessive form "its".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, while at it, let's use proper formal written English, so:
>>>>>> s/it's/it is
>>>>>> s/isn't/is not
>>>>>
>>>>> Fine with me, do you want me to send you another patch with those changes?
>>>>
>>>> Yes please.
>>>
>>> I sent a v2 patch changing those things you pointed out, however, the
>>> whole comment[0] looks informal "But wait.. there's more" and I don't
>>> think replacing "it's" with "it is" achieves a lot in this case.
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Indeed. Do you want it in or can I drop it ?
>
> Given that the language is mostly informal, I'd rather see the first
> patch applied (if that is OK with you). However, I agree with you that
> it would be nice to see formal language used, I just don't think I'm
> the right person to change all the comments in that file. :(
OK. I will look at it.
>
> Thanks,
> Diego
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 1:14 AM Damien Le Moal
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 3/23/22 17:44, Diego Viola wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 5:17 AM Damien Le Moal
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/23/22 16:24, Diego Viola wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:53 AM Damien Le Moal
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/23/22 14:52, Diego Viola wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:45 AM Damien Le Moal
> >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 3/23/22 14:40, Diego Viola wrote:
> >>>>>>> Use the contraction "it's" instead of the possessive form "its".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Well, while at it, let's use proper formal written English, so:
> >>>>>> s/it's/it is
> >>>>>> s/isn't/is not
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fine with me, do you want me to send you another patch with those changes?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes please.
> >>>
> >>> I sent a v2 patch changing those things you pointed out, however, the
> >>> whole comment[0] looks informal "But wait.. there's more" and I don't
> >>> think replacing "it's" with "it is" achieves a lot in this case.
> >>
> >> :)
> >>
> >> Indeed. Do you want it in or can I drop it ?
> >
> > Given that the language is mostly informal, I'd rather see the first
> > patch applied (if that is OK with you). However, I agree with you that
> > it would be nice to see formal language used, I just don't think I'm
> > the right person to change all the comments in that file. :(
>
> OK. I will look at it.
OK, thank you.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Diego
>
>
> --
> Damien Le Moal
> Western Digital Research
Diego