From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 20:04:08 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Makefile: Improve wording in a comment
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kZdm6a7KDpNyWdLoG5Rc2f-1fCRk1pkg8U2RD3azotkBg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHGBnuO3wgE_pLu1jcEyExhrzd+Fk_0Uqs23pFgf1NSZpUxVfQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Sebastian Schuberth
<sschuberth@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Sebastian Schuberth
> <sschuberth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Is that an improvement?  Is the plural of "dup" (used as an
>>> abbreviation of "duplicate") "dupes" not "dups"?
>>
>> My view is that the abbreviation of "duplicate" is not "dup" but
>> "dupe", hence the plural "dupes".
>
> For "duplicate" the noun, that is. For "duplicate" the verb I'd be ok
> with "dup" as the abbreviation. "to dup" sounds and looks better than
> "to dupe" :-)
>

We could also not abbreviate that word to avoid discussion there.