libtool-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: libtool versioning


From: Dave Korn
Subject: Re: libtool versioning
Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 18:05:45 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)

On 04/05/2010 18:56, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

> I'll apply the patch below soon unless I hear complaints.

  "Complain" is too strong a word for what I'm about to do... nitpick, quibble
or kibbitz might be better :)  Disclaimer aside, ...

> -The following explanation may help to understand the above rules a bit
> +The following explanation can help to understand the above rules a bit

  Either "might" or "may" sound appropriate here, but "can" is a bit
odd-sounding to this native speaker's ears.

  If we were re-wording the sentence to make the listener the explicit
subject, we would write "You may find the following explanation helpful" or
"You might find the following explanation helpful" but not "You can find the
following explanation helpful"; the first two describe something that is a
possible state of affairs, but in the "can" formulation it sounds like the
speaker is giving the listener permission to find the explanation helpful.

  Saying that the explanation "can help" makes the explanation sound like an
active agent rather than a passive object: it is the reader who can or can not
help themselves, using the explanation to do so, rather than the explanation
that jumps up and sets about helping the reader.

> -drop-in replacement, but programs using the new version may use APIs not
> +drop-in replacement, but programs using the new version can use APIs not

  I'd have left this one alone, the use of "may" emphasises that it is
conditional/subjunctive, which I think is the more important sense of the
sentence than the "are able to" sense which is implied.

>  present in the previous one.  In other words, a program linking against
> -the new version may fail with ``unresolved symbols'' if linking against
> +the new version might fail with ``unresolved symbols'' if linking against
>  the old version at runtime: set @var{revision} to 0, bump @var{current}
>  and @var{age}.
>  
>  @item
> -Programs may need to be changed, recompiled, relinked in order to use
> +Programs might need to be changed, recompiled, relinked in order to use
>  the new version.  Bump @var{current}, set @var{revision} and @var{age}

  These last two I'd say too close to call, purely a matter of personal taste.

    cheers,
      DaveK






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]