Re: Describing Source Code

[MAGGIE SECARA <SECARAM -at- MAINSAVER -dot- COM>]

        It doesn't negate the rules of English but it does seem needlessly
poetic.  How about:

        When HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR, the algorithm allows the message to be
sent to the HEH.

        or

        The message can be sent to the HEH only when HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR

        (I'm ignoring other kinds of changes I'd make personally to allow
for my own ignorance of the contents of the sentence.)


Cheers!

Maggie
secaram -at- mainsaver -dot- com

A Compendium of Common Knowledge
http://ren.dm.net


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dattatreya [SMTP:datta -at- WIPINFO -dot- SOFT -dot- NET]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 1999 7:26 AM
> To:   TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject:      Describing Source Code
>
        <snip>
>  Therefore, every single functionality is explained in detail.  I wanted
> to
> know if  we can have the following construction:
>
> "Only when HHcnommi==HH_ENADIR, will the algorithm allow the message to be
> sent to the HEH."
>
> This is similar to
>
> "Only if I see a blue car, will I open the gate."
>
> The developers contention is that the stress should be on the consequences
> first and the actions later.  However, I have been arguing that the above
> constructions negate the rules of English.
>
> Am I right with this argument.  Please reply me offline. I shall summarise
> it for the rest if I find some interesting stuff.
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Regards.
> M S Dattatreya
>
>


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=