Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?

From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?
Date: 2003-05-01 12:48:52
Message-ID: 20030501124852.GD9725@libertyrms.info
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 08:31:27PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> This is common usage in requirements docs - I suspect it has a government,
> perhaps a military origin. Even after vetting and helping to author a great
> many requirements docs it still makes me cringe, but then I don't split
> infinitives either ;-)

<totally ot>
It shouldn't make you cringe. According to Fowler
(<http://www.bartleby.com/116/213.html>), this version of "shall" is
an example of the "pure system" in the distinction between shall and
will. So it's neither military nor government in origin, but
mediaeval. Anyway, it's not much different from "Thou shalt not
steal."
</totally ot>

A

--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-05-01 14:00:29 Re: [HACKERS] "Adding missing from clause"
Previous Message Mike Mascari 2003-05-01 12:38:18 Re: [HACKERS] Join Stallman and Software SMEs to refuse