Re: Describing Source Code

Subject: Re: Describing Source Code
From: MAGGIE SECARA <SECARAM -at- MAINSAVER -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:08:08 -0700

It doesn't negate the rules of English but it does seem needlessly
poetic. How about:

When HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR, the algorithm allows the message to be
sent to the HEH.

or

The message can be sent to the HEH only when HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR

(I'm ignoring other kinds of changes I'd make personally to allow
for my own ignorance of the contents of the sentence.)


Cheers!

Maggie
secaram -at- mainsaver -dot- com

A Compendium of Common Knowledge
http://ren.dm.net


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dattatreya [SMTP:datta -at- WIPINFO -dot- SOFT -dot- NET]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 1999 7:26 AM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Describing Source Code
>
<snip>
> Therefore, every single functionality is explained in detail. I wanted
> to
> know if we can have the following construction:
>
> "Only when HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR, will the algorithm allow the message to be
> sent to the HEH."
>
> This is similar to
>
> "Only if I see a blue car, will I open the gate."
>
> The developers contention is that the stress should be on the consequences
> first and the actions later. However, I have been arguing that the above
> constructions negate the rules of English.
>
> Am I right with this argument. Please reply me offline. I shall summarise
> it for the rest if I find some interesting stuff.
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Regards.
> M S Dattatreya
>
>


From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=



Previous by Author: Re: PC-Manmonth
Next by Author: Re: urgent: numbered list Word 97
Previous by Thread: Describing Source Code
Next by Thread: Making techwriters, take II


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads