On Tuesday, May 23, 2023, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> writes: > > On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 07:32 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> This is the current sentence, and it sounds kind of OK to me, FWIW: > >> "Postgres95 code was completely ANSI C and trimmed in size by 25%. > > > That uses "ANSI C" as an adjective, which I think is sloppy wording > > (even though English is somewhat relaxed about the distinction between > > classes of words). > > Yeah, it's not great English, but it's not awful English either; > just a rather telegraphic (abbreviated) style. > > Here's the thing: at this point, this documentation is itself a > historical artifact. git excavation dates the current wording to > 8baa8fcf4 of 1999-06-21, and that was just a small adjustment of > c8cfb0cea of 1998-03-01, and it seems likely that that was pulled > verbatim from some older source. > > So I'm disinclined to change it on grounds of "I think the grammar > is a bit shaky". It is what it is. > > >
Agreed. Besides, after a couple of more passes it grew on me, once I filled in the missing “compared to what” sufficiently. David J.
