Francois Gouget wrote: > On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Frédéric Delanoy wrote: > [...] >>> -rem Removing non-existent directory >>> +rem Removing nonexistent directory > [...] >> There is apparently no hard rule on the usage of hypens between 'non' >> and a subsequent adjective, but I've seen lots of "non-" (sometimes >> even "non ") so I wouldn't call that a spelling error. >> Furthermore, the "non-" form is more readable IMHO > > My paper dictionary lists a number of 'non-xxx' and 'nonxxx' words. It > has 'nonexistent' and not 'non-existent'. The Merriam-Webster also > prefers 'nonexistent'. > > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonexistent > > Mozilla did a pass through their code replacing 'onn-existent' with > 'nonexistent': > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=564091 > > > However I'll acknowledge that a number of other online dictionaries > seem to accept both forms. Maybe the explanation is in the Cambridge > Dictionaries; they have 'non-existent' in the British dictionary and > 'nonexistent' in the US one. > > http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/non-existent > http://dictionaries.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=nonexistent*1+0&dict=A > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nonexistent > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/non-existent > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nonexistent > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/non-existent > > Overall 'nonexistent' seemed better referenced in the dictionaries and > more 'legitimate'. But I can leave either form as is if that's > preferred. It is not a spelling fix then and shouldn't be included in a "spelling fixes" patch. You could do a "Standardize to 'nonexistent'" patch but that would IMHO stretch the scope of this kind of janitorial fixes.
bye michael