[erlang-questions] 'cannot' /= 'can not'

[empro2@REDACTED]

This is only the most recent occurrence that finally
makes me write this:

<quote>
[erlang-questions] Patch package OTP 20.3.8.3 released
Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:13:22 +0200
[...]
Note! The kernel-5.4.3.2 application can *not* be applied
      independently of other applications on an arbitrary
      OTP 20 installation.
[...]
</quote>

If it can not be applied independently then it can also be
applied independently - which, in this case, is
probably not what is meant. But this is guesswork, relying
on the reader already knowing the meaning of what is
being said, rendering the saying it much less useful.

Modals are a mess (spoken languages are, after ceturies of
abuse like the one discussed in "[erlang-questions] Orelse
and andalso as short-hand for case"), but they convey
critical meaning.

Nine(?) of ten "can not"s in the Erlang docs must be
"cannot" to convey the correct meaning. Reading the docs has
already made me convert every "can not" I read into
"cannot" - I mean *every*, not only those in the Erlang
docs - and then back again (only about 1 of 10 in the
Erlang docs). This is a real, and substantial, waste of
post-orbital CPU cycles; not the conversion itself, but the
distraction from understanding whatever meaning the author
actually tries to get across.

If someone with authority (and authorisation) could and
would please write and run a script and convert all "can
not" -> "cannot" in all OTP strings, binaries and comments?
This will introduce errors, as there actually are a few,
rare correct "can not"s, but it will correct about 9 times
more of wrong ones that really need to be "cannot".

At least in the doc strings?

Please?

Michael

-- 

Time is not money, but money is time: life-time people have
spent transforming their environment.