If that's how you write, how's your code?

[Gentile]

It's the spell checkers - if it's not red people assume it's fine hen you're / yours and all the mistakes that are otherwise valid English words in another context.

Unfortunately same goes for coding - you can write a perfectly valid and executable code that will compile or interpret just fine, but it won't do what it's supposed to.
For all of the above reasons I tend code in as high level langauge as possible.
For communicating with humans, unfortunately I have to use English, which is not easy to parse and does not have a strict mode therefore I use a moderately plain variant of it to try and get as much across as possible...

Spellcheckers are ace. But they don't catch everything. The one that catches me out all the time is "wont" and "won't". I often use the former (which of course means 'accustomed to') when I mean the later (a concatenation of 'would not'). Because they're both valid words, spellchecker doesn't do me any good in helping me avoid that one.

[Sysman]

It's the spill chuckers - if it's not red people assume it's fine then you're / yours and all the mistakes that are otherwise valid English words in another context.

FTFY

Unfortunately same goes for coding - you can write a perfectly valid and executable code that will compile or interpret just fine, but it won't do what it's supposed to.

Not a bad analogy. "Implicit none" was useful back in FORTRAN days to catch typos in variable names.

[suityou01]

Yep, I think that's right. The Yanks say "oriented" (and so do I most times - it's clearly crept into my usage at some point, probably from all that talk of object-oriented programming). But the formal British English appears to be "orientated".

Nope. Wrong.

[Gentile]

Nope. Wrong.

Oh look, it's you.

[Sysman]

Spellcheckers are ace. But they don't catch everything.

Does anyone use grammar checkers?

When I first came across one I ran it on a proposal that I had just written. I was always taught to write such things in the passive, for e≈ample "It was found that..." or "It is proposed that...". The grammar check had a dicky fit over this and suggested "I found...", and "I propose...", which came out as too "me, me, me" for a UK audience.

Dunno, perhaps we should blow our own trumpets a bit more.

[Sysman]

Nope. Wrong.

Has pantomime season started yet?

"Oh yes it is!"

[Gentile]

Does anyone use grammar checkers?

When I first came across one I ran it on a proposal that I had just written. I was always taught to write such things in the passive, for e≈ample "It was found that..." or "It is proposed that...". The grammar check had a dicky fit over this and suggested "I found...", and "I propose...", which came out as too "me, me, me" for a UK audience.

Dunno, perhaps we should blow our own trumpets a bit more.

I agree. I usually switch Word's grammar checker off because it's so useless. It's generally miles off in terms of producing readable English that flows nicely.

[Moscow Mule]

Nope. Wrong.

Has pantomime season started yet?

"Oh yes it is!"

Your career, IT'S BEHIND YOU!

[VectraMan]

Yep, I think that's right. The Yanks say "oriented" (and so do I most times - it's clearly crept into my usage at some point, probably from all that talk of object-oriented programming). But the formal British English appears to be "orientated".

So is it object-oriention rather than object-orientation in American?

I say "oriented" but only because I'm conscious of wanting to say "orientated" and thought that must be wrong.

Americans write "Canceled" instead of "Cancelled" - something that's caught me out a few times of late.

[Gentile]

So is it object-oriention rather than object-orientation in American?

I say "oriented" but only because I'm conscious of wanting to say "orientated" and thought that must be wrong.

Americans write "Canceled" instead of "Cancelled" - something that's caught me out a few times of late.

I don't think I've heard either of those terms used. I've only heard the phrase "object oriented" used as both the subjunctive (present tense) and past indicative (talking about something in concrete rather than hypothetical past tense), in the context of a discrete approach to programming language design. i.e., people say both that "C# is an object-oriented language" and they talk about solutions that have been built with it as "having taken an object-oriented approach".