Re: [RFC] Backend vs. back-end (was: 2 'echo' bash instructions produce a table)

[Samuel Wales]

backend sounds good to me as a native speaker, for a term of art for
export modules or so, with defined api.  if you are talking about back
end code abstractly, i'd go for 2 words, but that's just me.  i
wouldn't rely on my sense for this one.

On 11/22/22, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> wrote:
> Alain.Cochard@unistra.fr writes:
>
>> PS 1: In the manual, I see "backend" and "back-end".  So it is an
>> issue similar to the "subtree/sub-tree" issue you fixed a few days
>> ago, to the "heading/headline" issue that was reported recently, and
>> to many similar cases I met in the past.  So I was wondering if there
>> could exist some (semi-)automatic way which would ensure that future
>> maintainers will not inadvertently re-introduce "sub-tree"
>> occurrences, or the like.  Perhaps some "accepted terminology" list
>> that would be checked upon?
>
> I looked into the manual. It has 197 instances of "back-end" and 24
> instances of "backend". In the code, "backend" is used almost exclusively
> in symbol names (except 5 instances), and "back-end" is used in the
> docstrings and comments.
>
> It is actually a bit confusing.
>
> I am looking at https://techterms.com/definition/backend, and it looks
> like "backend" is the correct word we need to use here. Am I missing
> something?
>
> --
> Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
> Org mode contributor,
> Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
> Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
> or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
>
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com