New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Avoid 'allows to' #2685
Avoid 'allows to' #2685
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. The old wording looked rather awkward.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am fine with this if lets one is not a newly introduced phrase. Marking as Request changes, but what I am really requesting is just that we think this through.
chapters/revisions.tex
Outdated
@@ -1265,7 +1265,7 @@ \subsection{Contributors to the Modelica Language, Version 3.2}\label{contributo | |||
and demonstrated its use on a vehicle dynamics example. Utilizing the | |||
prototype implementation, Francesco Casella demonstrated with a model of | |||
a thermal power plant with 390 iteration variables of the initialization | |||
problem, that an appropriate usage of the homotopy operator allows to | |||
problem, that an appropriate usage of the homotopy operator lets one |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't recognize us using one in this way. If that's correct, maybe we shouldn't start doing it now? For instance, why not this?
problem, that an appropriate usage of the homotopy operator allows the system to be initialized reliably without…
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, that makes sense - I have changed that now. It was only done in the revisions chapter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Requesting change, as I think it was unintentional to leave one occurrence of lets one.
chapters/operatorsandexpressions.tex
Outdated
@@ -804,7 +804,7 @@ \subsubsection{spatialDistribution}\label{spatialdistribution} | |||
solver. | |||
\end{nonnormative} | |||
|
|||
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! allows to approximate efficiently the solution of the infinite-dimensional problem | |||
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! lets one approximate efficiently the solution of the infinite-dimensional problem |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suppose this one was forgotten in the last commit? Maybe this could work:
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! lets one approximate efficiently the solution of the infinite-dimensional problem | |
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! allows efficient approximate solution of the infinite-dimensional problem |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It was missed, but I don't think that is the best option. I changed it more completely.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good now. Just leaving a comment that can be ignored.
@@ -804,7 +804,7 @@ \subsubsection{spatialDistribution}\label{spatialdistribution} | |||
solver. | |||
\end{nonnormative} | |||
|
|||
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! lets one approximate efficiently the solution of the infinite-dimensional problem | |||
\lstinline!spatialDistribution! allows the infinite-dimensional problem below to be solved efficiently with good accuracy |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not bad at all. How about some punctuation (like a period or a colon) at the end, before the equation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm... I will have to think more about which punctuation is best, so take that later.
Closes #2380