AaronBallman wrote: > I don’t have a very strong opinion on this if the consensus is that this is a > change for the better, but as someone with a background in linguistics, I’d > argue that this seems like a weird thing to discourage—I don’t think the > single quote is really distracting at all if it occurs in a common > contraction (e.g. isn’t, aren’t, don’t, doesn’t, etc.), because you simply > parse that as one word. Of course, I don’t think we should start writing > ‘you’dn’t’ve’ or anything absurd like that, but I don’t think there’s > anything wrong w/ normal contractions.
It's not a significant problem, it's more a "scanning the line to see where the syntax is" problem in that it's a visual distraction if you're trying to find the variable name being diagnosed for a complex expression and there are contractions in the wording. > > they can be harder to understand for non-native English speakers. > > I also don’t think this is true: simple contractions are one of the first > things we teach people, and I’ve yet to meet someone whose first language > isn’t English and doesn’t know what e.g. ‘isn’t’ is supposed to mean. Is > there any actual precedent for anyone being confused about this? I am not a linguist, but this is something I've heard many times over the years when talking about writing to a multilingual audience. e.g., https://techcomm.nz/Story?Action=View&Story_id=394 https://www.wikihow.life/Communicate-with-a-Non-Native-English-Speaker https://hodigital.blog.gov.uk/2015/12/29/tips-for-writing-for-non-native-english-speakers/ and others That said, I would not be surprised if we could find plenty of sources saying the opposite. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116803 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
