Re: [Boost-build] Documentation nitpicks

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-18 07:14:38

Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Friday 05 May 2006 23:14, David Abrahams wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> > On Monday 03 April 2006 21:00, Richard Peters wrote:
>> >> line 399 and at other places, documentation speaks of 'built targets'.
>> >> Shouldn't these be 'build targets', meaning targets that are part of a
>> >> build, instead of targets that are already built?
>> >
>> > I'm not sure. "Built targets" can be read as "targets that will be
>> > built".
>>
>> Yes, it *can*, but it can also be read the other way.  Isn't it
>> essential for documentation to avoid ambiguity?
>
> Do you mean that "build targets" are less ambiguous?

Yes.  Or, more precisely, "build targets" _is_ less ambiguous.

>> > Can native speakers say something?
>>
>> I don't think this has anything to do with whether I'm a native
>> speaker or not.  IMO you should pick the usage that's less open to
>> misinterpretation.  Richard's usage is fine. 
>
> So, I'll change "built targets" to "build targets" everywhere, right?

Unless you really mean the other interpretation, "targets that have
already been built," yes.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com