From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38DB22036D for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751523AbdKXOHS (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:07:18 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51727 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750737AbdKXOHR (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:07:17 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A541DBBB70; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:07:16 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=TQTYcbjeSwFJGebWyK9ovO8vAtQ=; b=l1aaKp 6cwWSwCgdmTSYdm1EkwMmWoAP4729S8IjKgvmH25p6Q7eG4iHqixQOLY8Ft+z63Y FZu45WJzybZn5Rq0FZJCaEb0BIFcGWzvLd3QT6CebPaykMgDTHffKrL5egHYL8Wn SVSoJ+2Cag4yIK20j9SRpxhltZ9XbMYhg9f8E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=m1eztq2ce9Oy8mL8v9sZmoViUX+IytO/ 3IBHUEOloXsbqW7dsa1JVxOUlGb0hC01K5FMCtXbj/v41O35zU7fGdqRxf0+8vuV Zv/a5TB8/Bt+WNyj/mlM9V5ZrT9QvgY8FA2hLtBie9t1OCai5+/UouqtU+XwJzEm CFnbDmoC5Us= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E4F6BBB6F; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:07:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B90ABBB6E; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:07:16 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Robert P. J. Day" Cc: Git Mailing list Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] doc: clarify that "git bisect" accepts one or more good commits References: Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 23:07:14 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 24 Nov 2017 22:27:19 +0900") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C6B9BA26-D120-11E7-8805-575F0C78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > "Robert P. J. Day" writes: > >> in this sense, i don't think "indicate" and "identify" are >> completely interchangeable. in my mind, the word "identify" does >> nothing more than, you know, point at something and say, "that one, >> that's the one i'm talking about;" it goes no further than that. >> >> on the other hand, the word "indicate" (in my mind) implies that >> you're about to provide some *property* or *quality* of something, and >> you do exactly that in the earlier quote: > > I do not think the two words have different connotations, so we are > in agreement. You do not necessarily need a property in mind when Eek. I do do think the two words are not interchangeable. I should stop typing late at night.