Re: Fix typos

Hi,

Attached fixes some typos for "serialise" => "serialize" and "materialise"
=> "materialize".

Regards,
-- Sehrope Sarkuni
Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/

On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:24:17AM -0400, Sehrope Sarkuni wrote:
> Attached fixes some typos for "serialise" => "serialize" and "materialise"
> => "materialize".

These don't seem to be typos:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/materialise
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/serialise
--
Michael

Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:24:17AM -0400, Sehrope Sarkuni wrote:
>> Attached fixes some typos for "serialise" => "serialize" and "materialise"
>> => "materialize".

> These don't seem to be typos:
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/materialise
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/serialise

It's British vs. American spelling. For the most part, Postgres
follows American spelling, but there's the odd Briticism here and
there. I'm not sure whether it's worth trying to standardize.
I think the most recent opinion on this was Munro's:

/message-id/CA+hUKGJz-pdMgWXroiwvN-aeG4-AjdWj3gWdQKOSa8g65spdVw@mail.gmail.com

regards, tom lane

On 2019-Aug-01, Tom Lane wrote:

> It's British vs. American spelling. For the most part, Postgres
> follows American spelling, but there's the odd Briticism here and
> there. I'm not sure whether it's worth trying to standardize.
> I think the most recent opinion on this was Munro's:
>
> /message-id/CA+hUKGJz-pdMgWXroiwvN-aeG4-AjdWj3gWdQKOSa8g65spdVw@mail.gmail.com

I think slight variations don't really detract from the value of the
product, and consider the odd variation a reminder of the diversity of
the project. I don't suggest that we purposefully introduce spelling
variations, or that we refrain from fixing ones that appear in code
we're changing, but I don't see the point in changing a line for the
sole reason of standardising the spelling of a word.

That said, I'm not a native English speaker.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:01:59PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think slight variations don't really detract from the value of the
> product, and consider the odd variation a reminder of the diversity of
> the project. I don't suggest that we purposefully introduce spelling
> variations, or that we refrain from fixing ones that appear in code
> we're changing, but I don't see the point in changing a line for the
> sole reason of standardising the spelling of a word.

Agreed. This always reminds me of ANALYZE vs. ANALYSE where we don't
actually document the latter :)

> That said, I'm not a native English speaker.

Neither am I.
--
Michael

On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:18 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> It's British vs. American spelling. For the most part, Postgres
> follows American spelling, but there's the odd Briticism here and
> there.

Thanks for the explanation. I thought that might be the case but didn't
find any other usages of "serialise" so was not sure.

> I'm not sure whether it's worth trying to standardize.
> I think the most recent opinion on this was Munro's:
>
>
> /message-id/CA+hUKGJz-pdMgWXroiwvN-aeG4-AjdWj3gWdQKOSa8g65spdVw@mail.gmail.com

Either reads fine to me and the best rationale I can think of for going
with one spelling is to not have the same "fix" come up again.

If there is a desire to change this, attached is updated to include one
more instance of "materialise" and a change to the commit message to match
some similar ones I found in the past.

Regards,
-- Sehrope Sarkuni
Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 12:11 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:01:59PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I think slight variations don't really detract from the value of the
> > product, and consider the odd variation a reminder of the diversity of
> > the project. I don't suggest that we purposefully introduce spelling
> > variations, or that we refrain from fixing ones that appear in code
> > we're changing, but I don't see the point in changing a line for the
> > sole reason of standardising the spelling of a word.
>
> Agreed. This always reminds me of ANALYZE vs. ANALYSE where we don't
> actually document the latter :)
>

I didn't know about that. That's a fun one!

>
> > That said, I'm not a native English speaker.
>
> Neither am I.
>

I am. Consistency is nice but either reads fine to me. Only brought it up
as I didn't see many other usages so seemed out of place.

Regards,
-- Sehrope Sarkuni
Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/