The fewer bugs you’ll introduce.
I don’t know squat about kernel programming, though. :-)
I don’t know squat about kernel programming, though. :-)
The idea to use “fewer” for countable things was someone’s personal preference. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/fewer-vs-less
“This rule is simple enough and looks easy enough to follow, but it's not accurate for all usage. The fact is that less is also sometimes used to refer to number among things that are counted.
“This isn't an example of how modern English is going to the dogs. Less has been used this way for well over a thousand years—nearly as long as there's been a written English language.”
See also the list of common counter examples.
Fewer emphasizes number; less emphasizes quantity. So, I would ask myself if I prefer saying the number of bugs or the quantity of bugs, and then choose accordingly. I prefer number, here. On account of that, I prefer fewer.
As to myriad, though it can be used as a noun (and apparently its use as a noun predates its use as an adjective), written language for the past 150-plus years prefers the adjective. (When Garner is talking about written language, he's talking about quality writing.)
I'm not saying you're wrong. But, style is as much about a sense of style as anything. Keeping language from going to the dogs requires a bit of dressing up.
It’s fine to hone your style and exercise your own preference, I have absolutely nothing against that. Correcting people is something completely different.
I think the relevant part of the "Exceptions to the Rule" section on that page is:
> The use of less to modify ordinary plural count nouns (as in "made less mistakes") is pretty rare in writing and is usually better avoided, though it does occur frequently in speech.
The exceptions (refering to distances/sums of money/units of time and weight/ statistical enumerations, phrases like "or less", and uses of "less" immediately following a number) aren't relevant here.
But both are "fine" in that they will be correctly understood.
> both are “fine” in that they will be correctly understood.
Agree! So much! I would go further, because I think this is the most important point: there is not a way to misunderstand the use of “less” in this context, which means that correcting people is purely pedantic, and not a functional issue or helping avoid potential misunderstanding.
Not only that, but sometimes people use “less” rather than “fewer” intentionally for countable things than can have a qualitative weight to them, as @danielheath pointed out. If the parent was trying to say that the bugs themselves could be both fewer in number, and also less damaging in scope, then less and fewer have two different meanings, and less is the more correct word to use.
> use of less […] is pretty rare in writing and is usually better avoided
Yes, I chose to emphasize that the rule is not absolute. Lots of people claim the rule is absolute, and a correction implies that point of view. My point is that even if using ‘less’ is better avoided, unsolicited corrections in public are also better avoided, because the rule is not absolute and in this case cannot be mistaken or misunderstood.
Worth noting that HN comments are not formal writing, and social media by and large is closer to informal speech, so the snippet you quoted can be viewed as validating use of less in this specific case.
Insert ironic joke here to make an open sandwich.