Re: [PATCH 1/4] ident: remove unused author_ident_sufficiently_given()

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 3, 2026, 19:00 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqtslx7nam.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <aum2GVDloMarZvwi@pks.im>

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 10:39:53AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> A pair of functions {author,committer}_ident_sufficiently_given()
>> were created to replace user_ident_explicitly_given() in d6991ceedc
>
> Nit, not worth a reroll, but isn't it "was created" as it is a singular
> pair? Might just be me not being a native speaker though.

Neither am I a native speaker, but "Syntactic vs Notional Agreement" is what makes both valid.

Treating the "pair" as a singular subject is the strictly formal choice preferred by most academic and traditional style guides.

Even though "pair" is grammatically singular, it represents two distinct things, and in this particular case, we are retiring one of them while keeping the other, treating the "pair" as a separable two.