Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 at 16:18, David Rowley wrote: > There's just 1 instance of "a SQL" that crept into PG16 after > d866f0374. This probably means I'd be better off doing this in June a > few weeks before branching... > > Patch attached. Pushed. David

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 at 17:43, David Rowley wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 13:44, David Rowley wrote: > > Anyway, I'll set an alarm for this time next year so I can check on > > how many inconsistencies have crept back in over the development > > cycle. > > That alarm went off today. > > There

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 05:43:04PM +1200, David Rowley wrote: > That alarm went off today. > > There seem to be only 3 "a SQL"s in the docs to change to "an SQL". > > This is a pretty old thread, so here's a link [1] to the discussion. Good catches! -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 13:44, David Rowley wrote: > Anyway, I'll set an alarm for this time next year so I can check on > how many inconsistencies have crept back in over the development > cycle. That alarm went off today. There seem to be only 3 "a SQL"s in the docs to change to "an SQL".

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 6/13/21 7:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 07:36:54AM +0100, Geoff Winkless wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021, 15:35 Alvaro Herrera, wrote: >>> src/backend/libpq/auth.c:847:* has. If it's an MD5 hash, we must do >>> MD5 authentication, and if it's a >>>

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 07:36:54AM +0100, Geoff Winkless wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021, 15:35 Alvaro Herrera, wrote: >> src/backend/libpq/auth.c:847:* has. If it's an MD5 hash, we must do >> MD5 authentication, and if it's a >> src/backend/libpq/auth.c:848:* SCRAM secret, we must do SCRAM

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021, 15:35 Alvaro Herrera, wrote: > src/backend/libpq/auth.c:847:* has. If it's an MD5 hash, we must do > MD5 authentication, and if it's a > src/backend/libpq/auth.c:848:* SCRAM secret, we must do SCRAM > authentication. > Not sure whether you were just listing

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 05:39:00PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I suspect "an historic" is bordering on archaic even in the UK these days. Don't trigger me on the difference between "historic" and "historical"! ;-) (Hey, not every day I get to trim quoted text to one line --- see recent

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 04:04, Tom Lane wrote: > However, I'm also > unlikely to worry about this point when copy-editing docs. I'm sorry to hear that. Maybe keeping this consistent will be one of those endless jobs like keeping the source code pgindented. We still try to keep that in order

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 09:39, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I suspect "an historic" is bordering on archaic even in the UK these days. Yeah, that's a weird one. Maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-dropping is to blame. David

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:48, Isaac Morland wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 10:43, David Rowley wrote: >> >> - requires an MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen >> sockets. >> + requires a MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen sockets. >> >> I think all of

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 6/10/21 5:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Gavin Flower writes: >> On 11/06/21 8:17 am, Isaac Morland wrote: >>> ... But then there is "an historic occasion" so go figure. >> The 'h' in 'historic' is silent, at least it used to be -- I think now >> it is almost silent. So using 'an historic

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

Gavin Flower writes: > On 11/06/21 8:17 am, Isaac Morland wrote: >> ... But then there is "an historic occasion" so go figure. > The 'h' in 'historic' is silent, at least it used to be -- I think now > it is almost silent. So using 'an historic occasion' is correct. It's silent according to

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 11/06/21 8:17 am, Isaac Morland wrote: On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 16:11, Gavin Flower mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>> wrote: On 11/06/21 2:48 am, Isaac Morland wrote: > “A MIT …”? As far as I know it is pronounced M - I - T, which would > imply that it should use “an”. The

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 16:11, Gavin Flower wrote: > On 11/06/21 2:48 am, Isaac Morland wrote: > > > “A MIT …”? As far as I know it is pronounced M - I - T, which would > > imply that it should use “an”. The following page seems believable and > > is pretty unequivocal on the issue: > > > >

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 11/06/21 2:48 am, Isaac Morland wrote: On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 10:43, David Rowley > wrote: -      requires an MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen sockets. +       requires a MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen sockets.

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

David Rowley writes: > If you really feel that strongly about not changing this then I can > drop this. However, I'll likely growl every time I see "a SQL" in the > docs from now on. [ shrug... ] I'm not going to stand in your way. However, I'm also unlikely to worry about this point when

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 03:24, Tom Lane wrote: > If there were some semblance of an overall consensus on the spelling, > I'd be fine with weeding out the stragglers. But when the existing > usages are only about 2-to-1 in one direction or the other, I feel > quite confident in predicting that

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

David Rowley writes: > On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:53, Tom Lane wrote: >> Indeed. I think this is entirely pointless; there's zero hope that >> any consistency you might establish right now will persist very long. > hmm. Yet we do have other standards which we do manage to maintain. If there

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:53, Tom Lane wrote: > Indeed. I think this is entirely pointless; there's zero hope that > any consistency you might establish right now will persist very long. > The largest effect of this proposed patch will be to create > back-patching headaches. hmm. Yet we do

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

Alvaro Herrera writes: > On 2021-Jun-10, David Rowley wrote: >> It seems we have no standard as to if we say "a SQL" or "an SQL". > I was just reading the standard a couple of days ago and happened to > notice that the standard itself in some places uses "a SQL" and in other > places "an SQL".

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2021-Jun-10, David Rowley wrote: > > My regex foo is not strong enough to think how I might find multiline > > instances. > > This catches some of these: > > ag "\sa[\s*]*\n[\s*]*(A|E|F|H|I|L|M|N|O|S|X)[A-Z]{2,5}\s" Thanks. I ended up

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 10:43, David Rowley wrote: > - requires an MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen > sockets. > + requires a MIT Kerberos installation and opens TCP/IP listen > sockets. > > I think all of these should use "a" rather than "an". > “A MIT …”? As far as

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:04, David Rowley wrote: > I came up with the attached patch. Further searching using: git grep -E "\s(an|An)\s(F|H|L|M|N|S|X)[A-Z]{2,5}" (i.e vowel sounding, but not actually starting with a vowel then manually looking for pronounceable ones.) - by a response from

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 2021-Jun-10, David Rowley wrote: > I thought it might be worth having this conversation before we branch for v15. > > It seems we have no standard as to if we say "a SQL" or "an SQL". I was just reading the standard a couple of days ago and happened to notice that the standard itself in some

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 1:27 AM David Rowley wrote: > > I think we should change all 55 instances of "a SQL" in the docs to > use "an SQL" and leave the 800 other instances of "a SQL" alone. +1 Consistency is good. Roberto

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 20:58, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > On 10 Jun 2021, at 10:54, Dave Page wrote: > > > .. I would perhaps suggest extending to any user-visible messages in the > > code. > > I agree, consistent language between docs and user-facing messages is > important. Yeah, agreed.

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

> On 10 Jun 2021, at 10:54, Dave Page wrote: > .. I would perhaps suggest extending to any user-visible messages in the code. I agree, consistent language between docs and user-facing messages is important. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 9:31 AM Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 10.06.21 09:26, David Rowley wrote: > > It seems we have no standard as to if we say "a SQL" or "an SQL". > > The SQL standard uses "an SQL-something". > I use both commonly, but the argument for

Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

On 10.06.21 09:26, David Rowley wrote: It seems we have no standard as to if we say "a SQL" or "an SQL". The SQL standard uses "an SQL-something". However, we mostly use "an SQL" in the docs. ~/pg_src$ cd doc/ ~/pg_src/doc$ git grep -E "\s(a|A)\sSQL\s" | wc -l 55 ~/pg_src/doc$ git grep -E

"an SQL" vs. "a SQL"

I thought it might be worth having this conversation before we branch for v15. It seems we have no standard as to if we say "a SQL" or "an SQL". Personally, I pronounce the language as es-que-ell, so I'd write "an SQL". If you say "sequel", then you'll think differently. The reason I do this is