From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3/2) with ESMTP id EAA21848 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 04:29:45 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA13513; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:18:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Geoff Wing Message-Id: <199606281817.SAA21672@werple.net.au> Subject: Re: zsh-3.0-pre1 released To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu (zsh-list) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 04:17:51 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199606281752.KAA08541@tenor.clarinet.com> from "Wayne Davison" at Jun 28, 96 10:52:23 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qikvd3.0.3J3.u72rn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1470 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu :Zefram writes: :> "depreciate" and "deprecate" are both valid English words. They have :> completely different meanings, and the appropriate one here is :> "deprecate". :The words are different, but not "completely" different (in my dictionary :one of the definitions for deprecate says "To belittle; depreciate"). :However, I have never heard of deprecate being used in the cited context, :while I have heard depreciate used many times in similar circumstances. :I believe that depreciate is the better choice. Don't want to turn this list into a language debate but deprecate is the desired meaning and I come across it used this way quite a lot in the computer world. And in my interpretation they mean completely different things here. BTW, I only had the "cd BUG in doshfunc" bug (which Zoltan's sent a patch for) show with chpwd() set to do something. -- Mason [G.C.W] mason@werple.mira.net.au "Hurt...Agony...Pain...LOVE-IT"