4 ms·

"X for Y" isn't a new thing ("Windows for Workgroups", 1993) but I think the phrasing is possibly more common in the tech world than outside it.

kzrdude 3y ago
What about "German for Engineers"? is that the same "for"? I'm thinking of a ficticious language course for engineers..
- wongarsu 3y ago
  While "Engineers for Ukraine" is probably about building drones and shipping them to the Russian border region.
ithinkso 3y ago
That's not it, X for Y sounds completely normal as in 'food for kids' or something. But I have read the title as if io_uring added support for libuv.
- refulgentis 3y ago
  I’m a native speaker, read it wrong at first, and had to think step by step. “well, libuv is a JS-related library, io_ring is an OS level concept, so its probably a change to libuv”, and still had uncertainty and opened GitHub to double check. You make a really good point I never heard before: X for Y is an ambiguous construct with two names referring to the same class of object, without an obvious relationship. Ex. Barack for Don is easy, but only if you know American politics, a reference to “a predecessor”. But “Jon for Mary” is inscrutable.
- wongarsu 3y ago
  That would be "io_uring: support for libuv". Which is a common way to write headlines, so assuming the headline was missing punctuation was reasonable. (in case the title changes later, it's currently "io_uring support for libuv")
- earthling8118 3y ago
  I think this is a slightly different case than the WSL one. The headline is accurate, but perhaps a bit jarring. It might have been better to say "io_uring support in libuv" but I would say using from is not incorrect.
- josephg 3y ago
  Hm? The word “for” has the same meaning here as in “food for kids”. Read it as (io_uring support) for (libuv). “Io_uring support” is being provided. Provided for what? Provided for libuv.
- gnfargbl 3y ago
  Looking at it again I think the problem is that both X and Y are of the same type which makes the overall sentence confusing, even though it is technically correct. In a more normal construction ("food voucher support for kids") it is obvious from context that the kids are being given the support, because the converse would be nonsensical.
refulgentis 3y ago
Toys for Tots, food for thought.
yencabulator 3y ago
Windows for Workgroups was a version of Windows specifically suited for use by "work groups", whatever they though that was. So, by that logic, clearly then Windows Subsystem for Linux is a version of Windows specifically suited for running under Linux.

kzrdude 3y ago

What about "German for Engineers"? is that the same "for"? I'm thinking of a ficticious language course for engineers..

wongarsu 3y ago
While "Engineers for Ukraine" is probably about building drones and shipping them to the Russian border region.

ithinkso 3y ago

That's not it, X for Y sounds completely normal as in 'food for kids' or something. But I have read the title as if io_uring added support for libuv.

refulgentis 3y ago
I’m a native speaker, read it wrong at first, and had to think step by step. “well, libuv is a JS-related library, io_ring is an OS level concept, so its probably a change to libuv”, and still had uncertainty and opened GitHub to double check. You make a really good point I never heard before: X for Y is an ambiguous construct with two names referring to the same class of object, without an obvious relationship. Ex. Barack for Don is easy, but only if you know American politics, a reference to “a predecessor”. But “Jon for Mary” is inscrutable.
wongarsu 3y ago
That would be "io_uring: support for libuv". Which is a common way to write headlines, so assuming the headline was missing punctuation was reasonable. (in case the title changes later, it's currently "io_uring support for libuv")
earthling8118 3y ago
I think this is a slightly different case than the WSL one. The headline is accurate, but perhaps a bit jarring. It might have been better to say "io_uring support in libuv" but I would say using from is not incorrect.
josephg 3y ago
Hm? The word “for” has the same meaning here as in “food for kids”. Read it as (io_uring support) for (libuv). “Io_uring support” is being provided. Provided for what? Provided for libuv.
gnfargbl 3y ago
Looking at it again I think the problem is that both X and Y are of the same type which makes the overall sentence confusing, even though it is technically correct. In a more normal construction ("food voucher support for kids") it is obvious from context that the kids are being given the support, because the converse would be nonsensical.

refulgentis 3y ago

Toys for Tots, food for thought.

yencabulator 3y ago

Windows for Workgroups was a version of Windows specifically suited for use by "work groups", whatever they though that was. So, by that logic, clearly then Windows Subsystem for Linux is a version of Windows specifically suited for running under Linux.