[clang] Clarify use of contractions in diagnostic messages (PR #116803)

[via cfe-commits]

llvmbot wrote:


<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT-->

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Aaron Ballman (AaronBallman)

<details>
<summary>Changes</summary>

This dissuades contributors from using contractions when writing diagnostic wording for Clang. Contractions should be avoided because of the potential for visual confusion with single quoting syntactic constructs and because they can be harder to understand for non-native English speakers.

---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116803.diff


1 Files Affected:

- (modified) clang/docs/InternalsManual.rst (+4) 


``````````diff
diff --git a/clang/docs/InternalsManual.rst b/clang/docs/InternalsManual.rst
index f189cb4e6a2ac3..39d389b816f129 100644
--- a/clang/docs/InternalsManual.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/InternalsManual.rst
@@ -160,6 +160,10 @@ wording a diagnostic.
   named in a diagnostic message. e.g., prefer wording like ``'this' pointer
   cannot be null in well-defined C++ code`` over wording like ``this pointer
   cannot be null in well-defined C++ code``.
+* Prefer diagnostic wording without contractions whenever possible. The single
+  quote in a contraction can be visually distracting due to its use with
+  syntactic constructs and contractions can be harder to understand for non-
+  native English speakers.
 
 The Format String
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116803