On 04/28/2017 03:09 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 28.04.2017 21:59, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 02:46 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
>>> On 27.04.2017 03:46, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>> For the 'alloc' command, accepting an offset in bytes but a length
>>>> in sectors, and reporting output in sectors, is confusing. Do
>>>> everything in bytes, and adjust the expected output accordingly.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
>>>>
>>
>>>> }
>>>> + if (!QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(bytes, BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE)) {
>>>> + printf("bytes %" PRId64 " is not sector aligned\n",
>>>
>>> This isn't real English. :-)
>>
>> But, it's just copy-and-paste from the other instances you just reviewed
>> in 6/17! [Translation - if I change this one, I also get to redo that one]
>
> No, those are "offset" and "count" -- all singular. "bytes" is plural. ;-)Then an obvious solution: s/bytes/count/ in the parameter name :) But I still get to redo those, to add the '-' in 'sector-aligned'. > >> >> Which of these various alternatives (if any) looks better: >> >> bytes=511 is not sector-aligned >> 511 is not a sector-aligned value for 'bytes' >> requested 'bytes' of 511 is not sector-aligned >> alignment error: 511 bytes is not sector-aligned >> 'bytes' must be sector-aligned: 511 >> your clever entry here... > > How about "byte count" instead of "bytes" or "bytes value", if really > want to have the exact spelling in there? > > For your entries above: (1) and (2) work for me (I like (2) a bit > better), (3) doesn't sound like real English either, and it should be > s/is/are/ in (4) (but it still sounds off with that change). (5) I > mostly dislike because I dislike error message of the form "This should > be X: $foo", I like "$foo is not X" better. Maybe this variation of (3) solves the singular/plural disconnect: request of 511 for 'bytes' is not sector-aligned which makes it obvious that the "request of 511" (singular) and not the parameter name (whether singular 'count' or plural 'bytes') is the subject. But it's a bit wordier than (2). So it looks like (2) may be a winner in all the situations. But I also think you convinced me to rename the command parameter; in my next spin, the help text will read: alloc offset [count] -- checks if offset is allocated in the file which starts to be non-trivial enough to drop R-b that you were willing to give for just an error message wording change. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
