On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 03:44:42 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:26:45 UTC, Elronnd wrote:
On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 17:33:07 UTC, matheus wrote:
By the way English isn't my first language but I think there
is a small typo:
"In D, such nuances are fewer, for header files are not
required."
I think it's missing the word "example":
"In D, such nuances are fewer, for example header files are
not required."
I think it is fine as is.
Yes, this is a perfectly correct use of "for" as a coordinating
conjunction. [1] It may come across as a bit formal or
old-fashioned, though—in normal speech, you'd usually use
"since".
[1] https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/coordconj/
I read that the "for" as an equivalent of "because" was indeed
almost extinct but was more or less resurrected by Tolkien as he
used it throughout Lord of the Rings and the
Hobbit.https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/566024/the-meaning-of-word-for-at-the-beginning-of-sentence
