[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code
From: |
Stefan Kangas |
Subject: |
Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Oct 2022 00:29:49 -0700 |
Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
> Also, out of curiosity, I thought active voice is good and passive
> voice is bad? Though the subject here doesn’t add any useful
> information, I recon.
I don't have an opinion about this particular change, but I don't think
we apply that in such a blanket fashion (i.e. "passive voice = bad").
Richard gave this advice on 15 October:
> The proposed manual text includes several sentences which use passive
> voice and would be shorter in active voice. Occasionally the use of
> passive voice is best approach, but usually not, so please try making
> them active and see if that makes the text more readable.
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-10/msg01276.html
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, (continued)
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Robert Pluim, 2022/10/28
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Po Lu, 2022/10/28
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Po Lu, 2022/10/28
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Yuan Fu, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Po Lu, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Po Lu, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Po Lu, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/29
- Re: Stylistic changes to tree-sitter code,
Stefan Kangas <=