On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 03:44:42 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:26:45 UTC, Elronnd wrote:
On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 17:33:07 UTC, matheus wrote:
By the way English isn't my first language but I think there
is a small typo:
"In D, such nuances are fewer, for header files are not
required."
I think it's missing the word "example":
"In D, such nuances are fewer, for example header files are
not required."
I think it is fine as is.
Yes, this is a perfectly correct use of "for" as a coordinating
conjunction. [1] It may come across as a bit formal or
old-fashioned, though—in normal speech, you'd usually use
"since".
[1] https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/coordconj/
for the benefit of ESL people, yes the two phrases are both
grammatically correct, but they do have different meanings. 'For'
here has a sense of 'because', implying the non-requirement of
header files is the main reason. When we say 'for example', it's
indicating one of a number of reasons.
