Re: 8.4 release notes proof reading 1/2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: 8.4 release notes proof reading 1/2
Date
Msg-id 4136ffa0903261922j52413d71ked85af39bb422136@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.4 release notes proof reading 1/2  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: 8.4 release notes proof reading 1/2  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
>> - "Previously EXPLAIN VERBOSE output an internal representation of the
>> query plan" -> s/output/outputs/ ?
>
> The existing wording seems correct.

I think Bruce's phrasing was in the past tense. It's a bit weird
because the verb form of "output" is a relatively recent invention and
the past tense isn't well settled. Dictionaries list both "outputted"
and "output" as past tense forms. Personally I think Bruce's "output"
sounds better than the alternative "outputted".

Perhaps "had output" would be clearer?

-- 
greg


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: 8.4 open items list
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: typedefs for indent