On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 10:32 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 4 Aug 2022, at 00:44, Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
> > Attachment is a patch with the "just" removed.
>
> I think this is a change for better, so I've pushed it. Thanks for the
> contribution!
>
>
Thanks!
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
> On 4 Aug 2022, at 00:44, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> Attachment is a patch with the "just" removed.
I think this is a change for better, so I've pushed it. Thanks for the
contribution!
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 12:42 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 11:15 AM Junwang Zhao wrote:
> >
> > Attachment is a corrected version based on Tom's suggestion.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 9:56 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > Erikjan Rijkers writes:
> > > > I d
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 11:15 AM Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
> Attachment is a corrected version based on Tom's suggestion.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 9:56 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Erikjan Rijkers writes:
> > > I don't think these "were"s are wrong but arguably changing them to
> > > "h
Attachment is a corrected version based on Tom's suggestion.
Thanks.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 9:56 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Erikjan Rijkers writes:
> > I don't think these "were"s are wrong but arguably changing them to
> > "have" helps non-native speakers (like myself), as it doesn't change the
Erikjan Rijkers writes:
> I don't think these "were"s are wrong but arguably changing them to
> "have" helps non-native speakers (like myself), as it doesn't change the
> meaning significantly as far as I can see.
I think it does --- it changes the meaning from passive to active.
I don't nece
yeah, not a grammar mistake at all, "were" should be used here, thanks
for pointing that out ;)
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:27 PM Erikjan Rijkers wrote:
>
> Op 03-08-2022 om 10:10 schreef Junwang Zhao:
> > I think in the following sentence, were should be replaced with have,
> > what do you think?
>
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:23 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 3 Aug 2022, at 10:10, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> >
> > I think in the following sentence, were should be replaced with have,
> > what do you think?
> >
> > ```
> >/*
> > -* We were just iss
Op 03-08-2022 om 10:10 schreef Junwang Zhao:
I think in the following sentence, were should be replaced with have,
what do you think?
```
/*
-* We were just issued a SAVEPOINT inside a
transaction block.
+* We have just iss
> On 3 Aug 2022, at 10:10, Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
> I think in the following sentence, were should be replaced with have,
> what do you think?
>
> ```
>/*
> -* We were just issued a SAVEPOINT inside a
> transaction block.
> +
I think in the following sentence, were should be replaced with have,
what do you think?
```
/*
-* We were just issued a SAVEPOINT inside a
transaction block.
+* We have just issued a SAVEPOINT inside a
transaction block.
11 matches
Mail list logo
