Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!randvax!segue!jim
From: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: POSIX bashing
Message-ID: <7021@segue.segue.com>
Date: 6 Apr 91 19:48:07 GMT
References: <15621@smoke.brl.mil> <BZS.91Mar29171508@world.std.com> <CNH5730.91Mar30113957@maraba.tamu.edu> <127225@uunet.UU.NET> <1991Apr2.033339.17048@dg-rtp.dg.com> <19145@rpp386.cactus.org>
Reply-To: jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter)
Organization: Segue Software, Inc. - Santa Monica, CA. +1-213-453-2161
Lines: 20

In article <19145@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes:
>"-ant" is a suffix - check your Webster's.

That doesn't mean that you can go adding it to any word willy-nilly.  An
unabridged dictionary will list the accepted uses of a suffix with the main
entries.

>My says "one that performs or promotes (a specified action) <coolant>",
>or "thing that is acted upon in (a specified manner) <inhalant>".
>Another entry exists which says "performing (a specified action)
><propellant>" or "promoting (a specified action or process) <expectorant>".

Unlike "conformant", those words are all in the dictionary.  They also happen
to be nouns, as is usually the case for new -ant words.  Not to worry, though,
the language grows, and "conformant" will probably make it into a later
edition.  Hopefully, though, the atrocious "prepend", which is used in place
of "prefix" for no good reason and made it into the C Standard, will not.
(Note though, that some lexicographers have given in to "irregardless",
although it is still generally labeled "nonstandard", putting it in the same
class as "ain't".)