"Failure" is a perfectly serviceable word and the cutesy "fail" is just annoying in a technical discussion like this.
"Failure" is a perfectly serviceable word and the cutesy "fail" is just annoying in a technical discussion like this.
I do not believe the people who plod through a huge multi-page, multi-code-sample question at StackOverflow are just casual dabblers who are likely to leap away from the discussion when they discover the top-rated answer features the word "failure."
I am sorry but you know what is REALLY annoying? Nit-picking at what must be the atomic level considering the depth and detail of this perfectly brilliant reply.
Technical discussions need a LOT more people like Alexander Yee aka "Mysticial" - and technical discussions sure as hell do not need ANY people like you complaining about the choice of words or slang as long as it is perfectly clear and understandable for the target audience and on that account he more than delivered.
Can't have it both ways. The more depth and detail a discussion tries to present, the more important it is to get the details right. The medium (StackExchange) even recognizes this and has editing, correcting, and collaborative fixing built into its DNA, for that very reason.
The more famous this response becomes, the more ESL readers there will be. Why trip them up this way? There's just no reason to use "fail" like this here.
"Branch prediction fail" is not actually a very clear or precise phrase. It could mean the failure of a single branch prediction attempt; it could mean the failure of the technique in a particular case, and it could refer to an author's opinion that it was a failure in general. Why muddy the waters?
You do not have a single reason to complain and the sooner you realize that, the better it will be for your own sake.
1) I am therefore worse than the Nazis
2) I'm the one who's being unreasonable
3) If something is popular it follows that it is also perfect and cannot be improved in any way.
Thanks for clearing that up.