Hacker News Reader

Comment by ithinkso | Hacker News Reader

It's the same 'for' in the title that I don't understand in the 'Windows subsystem for Linux'. English is not my native language but it is only recently that I started to notice this usage of for. Has it always been used like this?

Github post does it normally: 'Add io_uring support for several asynchronous file operations:'

View on HN

Unfortunately, "x y for z" can be parsed in multiple ways that result in opposite meanings.

Explaining with examples:

* [io_uring support] [for libuv]: "libuv has io_uring support"

* [io_uring] [support for libuv]: "io_uring has support for libuv"

* [Windows subsystem] [for Linux]: "Linux has a Windows subsystem"

* [Windows] [subsystem for Linux]: "Windows has a subsystem for Linux"

[x] [y for z] / "x has y for z" is much more common.

Don't feel bad. Windows Subsystem for Linux was just a horrible name.

They couldn't even be bothered to put an apostrophe on the end of Windows.

I guess the first thing to note is that ‘for’ is the kind of old common word that tends to have a lot of meanings. Nevertheless:

1. I think they are not the same senses. In ‘windows subsystem for Linux’, the word means ‘having as a function’ like in the phrase ‘spanner for 1/4 inch hex bolts’.

2. I think the sense in the title is more like ‘to the benefit of’ (or perhaps ‘affecting’ or ‘having the reason’) like ‘lunch for employees’ or ‘supports for the lintel’

3. I checked a couple of dictionaries and they had the sense but definitions for words like these can be pretty hard to read even for a native speaker.

Unless the title has been changed since your comment, it's not the same "for" as "Windows Services for Linux". In that, the first thing now has been modified to support the second thing. In "io_ring support for libuv", the second thing has been modified so it works with the first thing.

For what it's worth, I'm a native English speaker and I agree they both sound the wrong way round to me! But I can convince myself that they do also make sense the way round they were intended.

I think it's just that "Windows X for Y" where Y is a possibly trademarked entity works better for Microsoft in general. Maybe it wasn't risky for Linux, but if they ever want an other "Windows subsystem for Z", where Z is a trademarked name, then this puts them in the clear.

"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.

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.

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")

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Toys for Tots, food for thought.

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

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

In some cases, like "Windows Subsystem for Linux", there's also a common distinction that is caused by consistency in trademark usage.

"xyz for Windows" is allowed, while "Windows xyz" is reserved by the company to indicate that it is actually an official part of Windows.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com