On 7/7/22 21:56, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Thu, 7 Jul 2022 15:07:16 -0700, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote in
>> Here's an updated patch.
>
> Thinking RFC'ish, the meaning of "may" and "must" is significant in
> this description. On the other hand it uses both "may" and "can" but
> I thinkthat their difference is not significant or "can" there is
> somewhat confusing. I think the "can" should be "may" here.
+1.
> And since "must" is emphasized, doesn't "may" also needs emphasis?
I think emphasis only on must is fine.
Nathan, I don't see the language about being sure to persist to storage
here?
Regards,
-David
