From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 5/5] Speed up log -L... -M Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:04:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20130323090459.GB25600@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <72a500432c0e6fde830f505204a1d02180710656.1363865444.git.trast@student.ethz.ch> <87k3oyzmg7.fsf@pctrast.inf.ethz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Eric Sunshine , Thomas Rast , Git List , Junio C Hamano , Bo Yang , Zbigniew =?utf-8?Q?J=C4=99drzejewski-Szmek?= , Will Palmer To: Thomas Rast X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 23 10:05:49 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UJKOW-0002p3-BK for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 10:05:44 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754810Ab3CWJFO (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:05:14 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:36695 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754575Ab3CWJFM (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:05:12 -0400 Received: (qmail 9133 invoked by uid 107); 23 Mar 2013 09:06:57 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:06:57 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 23 Mar 2013 05:04:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87k3oyzmg7.fsf@pctrast.inf.ethz.ch> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 06:58:48AM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Thomas Rast wrote: > >> This is a bit hacky and should really be replaced by equivalent > >> support in --follow, and just using that. However, in the meantime it > > > > s/using/use/ > > I'm not a native speaker, but I really think 'using' is more correct > here. Cannot...resist...grammar discussion. I think you are both potentially right. You might consider the two items "equivalent support" and "using that" to be two noun phrases that are objects of the preposition "by", and that the writer simply omits the second "by" after the "and". In which case you are making a noun phrase from a verb phrase, and would want to use the gerund form "using". And the sentence, simplifying out some modifiers and adding the missing "by" (which is fine to omit, but the parts of speech become much clearer with it there), looks like: ...should be replaced by equivalent support, and by using that. However, you could also argue that the final clause is a second verb phrase for "this should" which just omits the extra "should" (which is also OK in a list. In which case "use" acts as a verb, and parses as: ...should be replaced by equivalent support, and this should just use that. So I think it is correct either way, and though it parses slightly differently, the overall meaning is the same. Phew. Totally not worth that much discussion, but for some reason I find these sorts of ambiguous language cases interesting. -Peff