[static_typed]

1. However well intentioned, this sort of pedantry (the change from 'him' to 'them') just alienates efforts to make things more inclusive, rather than actually helping .

2. Reverting the change appears to be fairly petty. By all means talk to the author of the commit about it, but commit tennis just makes the project look a little immature.

3. Is libuv really now at the point where it is 100% kitchen-sink-included-feature complete, mathematically and empirically tested bug proof, and with code so clean it brings a tear to a developer's eye? If not, then why are you all wasting time on such petty commits, and not on actually, you know, improving the code base.

My boss always puts herself in frame as the 'user' in her comments, documents and emails, so all examples are framed with 'her' in mind. Does anyone mind? Does anyone start making changes to 'them'? No, not really. I guess there are more important things to do.

[steveklabnik]

> rather than actually helping

Nope: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27784423?uid=246033817...

[Dylan16807]

So if I'm reading this right, using 'he' as a generic is actually worse than having explicitly male examples, in terms of comprehension?

Did they specifically test using 'they'? I would imagine that it would distract some people who expect plural, but I have no guess as to how large this factor would be in comparison.