Re: [PATCH 1/2] Trivial correction on document

[Cao jin]

On 06/21/2017 03:56 PM, Tim Murphy wrote:
> "that that" seems correct to me in this case and removing it incorrect. 
> There is a presumption and a conclusion and the sentence emphasises that
> the conclusion is still presumed.
> 

My feeling is, If we are orally saying the sentence, we may pause for a
while between "that that" to emphasize. like:

"and that,(pause to emphasize) that is bluh bluh"

But in text, our brain may not know to pause to feel the emphasis at the
1st reading. And after removing it, I feel more smooth when reading it.

This is not definitely a mistake, so, this patch maybe should called
"improvement", not "correction"

but anyway, I won't insist my option on this patch, because it is not
something make people confuse.
-- 
Sincerely,
Cao jin
> On 21 June 2017 at 06:38, Martin Dorey <address@hidden
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> 
>     My native English speaker intuition says that "if it were" and "if
>     it was" are both available there.
>      https://english.stackexchange.com/a/146382
>     <https://english.stackexchange.com/a/146382> cites Huddleston and
>     Pullum's grammar in agreement.  Other answers suggest the "were"
>     form is getting rarer, so maybe it's a good idea to change it, even
>     though it was right before.
> 
>     I just couldn't see the "that that" problem with a line break in
>     between them on my phone screen until a non-native speaker pointed
>     it out.  Doh.
> 
>     On Jun 20, 2017, at 21:14, Cao jin <address@hidden
>     <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> 
>     ---
>     doc/make.texi | 4 ++--
>     1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
>     diff --git a/doc/make.texi b/doc/make.texi
>     index dfa4454..343927b 100644
>     --- a/doc/make.texi
>     +++ b/doc/make.texi
>     @@ -1831,7 +1831,7 @@ more recent than it.
>     @item
>     How to update the file @file{foo.o}: by running @code{cc} as stated.
>     The recipe does not explicitly mention @file{defs.h}, but we presume
>     -that @file{foo.c} includes it, and that that is why @file{defs.h} was
>     +that @file{foo.c} includes it, and that is why @file{defs.h} was
>     added to the prerequisites.
>     @end itemize
>     @end ifnottex
>     @@ -10861,7 +10861,7 @@ into a Guile string and provided as the
>     result of the procedure.
>     @item gmk-eval
>     @findex gmk-eval
>     This procedure takes a single argument which is converted into a
>     -string.  The string is evaluated by @code{make} as if it were a
>     +string.  The string is evaluated by @code{make} as if it was a
>     makefile.  This is the same capability available via the @code{eval}
>     function (@pxref{Eval Function}).  The result of the @code{gmk-eval}
>     procedure is always the empty string.
>     -- 
>     2.1.0
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Bug-make mailing list
>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>     
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.gnu.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fbug-make&data=01%7C01%7Cmartin.dorey%40hds.com%7Ced5b6211411e4b2878dc08d4b85c03ef%7C18791e1761594f52a8d4de814ca8284a%7C0&sdata=WeHYB9LMF3RbDODG0tgIqH5gil43n4PmnzTDcog2JaA%3D&reserved=0
>     
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.gnu.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fbug-make&data=01%7C01%7Cmartin.dorey%40hds.com%7Ced5b6211411e4b2878dc08d4b85c03ef%7C18791e1761594f52a8d4de814ca8284a%7C0&sdata=WeHYB9LMF3RbDODG0tgIqH5gil43n4PmnzTDcog2JaA%3D&reserved=0>
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Bug-make mailing list
>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
>     <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make>
> 
>