On Feb 28, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Georg Brandl wrote: > On 28.02.2011 20:58, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >> Le lundi 28 février 2011 à 13:56 -0600, Benjamin Peterson a écrit : >>> 2011/2/28 Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net>: >>>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:36:11 -0500 >>>> Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> + an existing branch. The pusher then has to merge the superfetatory >>>>>> heads >>>>> >>>>> 'superfetatory'? I have no idea of what this is, neither does >>>>> merriam-webster.com ;-). >>>> >>>> There are some Google hits, though... Not sure if they are of people >>>> making the same mistakes as I do ;) >>> >>> Endly, perhaps it will be adopted. Did you mean "superfluous" though? >> >> I really meant superfetatory (it's slightly different: superfluous is >> simply useless, while superfetatory implies that it's in excess). > > Maybe "supernumerary" serves?
Plain, everyday English would serve better than using words which people need to look-up. How about: "The pusher should the merge extra, unused heads" or somesuch. Raymond _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
