I have decided that all examples in this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). For these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results. To further clarify the point system, the mysql command-line tool should be modified. No, not just the end-user database.

There is a small difference in meaning between “should be” and “be” in this context but it is so specific to the context that it is extremely trivial. All the examples that are in the book are written in MySQL so they can be run during startup and then shutdown. the decision to run against MySQL was made before the book was published and the note is not telling the reader that they should run the examples against MySQL; it is telling the reader that they are run against MySQL.

A case could be made for using “should be”, but program examples cannot be successfully run against the incorrect tooling and, therefore, wouldn’t actually run. With programming, the language typically drops the “should” in this context.

I don’t think the author should have included this for that very reason. A common style for these kinds of books is to refer to images, examples and figures as if they live in the future. This style will use “be” as a shortened form of “will be”.

More details on the context are below but the quick answer “should” is not necessary here because the author is intending to convey that the examples will be run in the future, after he creates them.

If a program that operates against a function

means to “run against” something then

it’s the case in MySQL. The relevant word at play is actually “run”: run — to operate or function

Without MySQL, no one will run arbitrary functions?

The choice of “have decided” makes the tenses in the sentence strange, in my opinion, and it seems to flow slightly better by replacing “have decided” by “decided” and “be” by “are/was”:

For these reasons, I decided that all examples for this book are run against a MySQL compiler (Version 5.3); 0) database, and that the mySql command-line tool was used to format query results.

Why is the author referencing the examples as if they hadn’t been written yet, they are in the “future” of the book. When they are eventually “written”, they “will be” run against MySQL. I have decided to

run this book against MySQL. For these reasons I have decided that all examples will be run against a MySQL (version 6). If you revert to 0) database (i.e. any database with an SQL query pending) when the mysql command line tool wont be used to format the query results (I would not consider this your first post).

I will run all example for this book

against MySQL (version 6)… for these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against JSON. (the author just chose to drop the “will” for his book)…. but he (the author) will delete the “will”: 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results.

Here are quick examples of all possible tense structures for this context.

1. They were created in the past (and were presumably run at creation) The
2. examples exist in the present (and could be run now) The
3. examples will exist in the future of the books pages (and will be run at the time of creation) The
4. examples will be run in the future by readers of the book (1)

would say “were run”, (2) would say “are run”, (3) would say “will be run” or “should be run” (4) would say “will be run” or “should be run”.

I suspect that the author is intending to convey (3) and, as such, used “be” in place of “will be”.

ie, “all examples for this book be run..” Inversely, if it read “all examples for this book

shall run..” then the “be” would be implied: “all examples for this book shall run.”

I don’t understand what is the difference between BrE and AmE. Can we use thatclause with should or present sv (subjunctive), but one can say that sv is very common in elevated style?

After verbs of volition BrE can use that clause with should or present tense/Present s.v. But in BrE the subjunctive is rare.

I have used the term “verbs of volition” for verbs expressing proposals, suggestions, requests and

orders.

I have decided that all examples in this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). For these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results. To further clarify the point system, the mysql command-line tool should be modified. No, not just the end-user database.

There is a small difference in meaning between “should be” and “be” in this context but it is so specific to the context that it is extremely trivial. All the examples that are in the book are written in MySQL so they can be run during startup and then shutdown. the decision to run against MySQL was made before the book was published and the note is not telling the reader that they should run the examples against MySQL; it is telling the reader that they are run against MySQL.

A case could be made for using “should be”, but program examples cannot be successfully run against the incorrect tooling and, therefore, wouldn’t actually run. With programming, the language typically drops the “should” in this context.

I don’t think the author should have included this for that very reason. A common style for these kinds of books is to refer to images, examples and figures as if they live in the future. This style will use “be” as a shortened form of “will be”.

More details on the context are below but the quick answer “should” is not necessary here because the author is intending to convey that the examples will be run in the future, after he creates them.

If a program that operates against a function

means to “run against” something then

it’s the case in MySQL. The relevant word at play is actually “run”: run — to operate or function

Without MySQL, no one will run arbitrary functions?

The choice of “have decided” makes the tenses in the sentence strange, in my opinion, and it seems to flow slightly better by replacing “have decided” by “decided” and “be” by “are/was”:

For these reasons, I decided that all examples for this book are run against a MySQL compiler (Version 5.3); 0) database, and that the mySql command-line tool was used to format query results.

Why is the author referencing the examples as if they hadn’t been written yet, they are in the “future” of the book. When they are eventually “written”, they “will be” run against MySQL. I have decided to

run this book against MySQL. For these reasons I have decided that all examples will be run against a MySQL (version 6). If you revert to 0) database (i.e. any database with an SQL query pending) when the mysql command line tool wont be used to format the query results (I would not consider this your first post).

I will run all example for this book

against MySQL (version 6)… for these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against JSON. (the author just chose to drop the “will” for his book)…. but he (the author) will delete the “will”: 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results.

Here are quick examples of all possible tense structures for this context.

1. They were created in the past (and were presumably run at creation) The
2. examples exist in the present (and could be run now) The
3. examples will exist in the future of the books pages (and will be run at the time of creation) The
4. examples will be run in the future by readers of the book (1)

would say “were run”, (2) would say “are run”, (3) would say “will be run” or “should be run” (4) would say “will be run” or “should be run”.

I suspect that the author is intending to convey (3) and, as such, used “be” in place of “will be”.

I don’t understand what is the difference between BrE and AmE. Can we use thatclause with should or present sv (subjunctive), but one can say that sv is very common in elevated style?

After verbs of volition BrE can use that clause with should or present tense/Present s.v. But in BrE the subjunctive is rare.

I have used the term “verbs of volition” for verbs expressing proposals, suggestions, requests and

orders.

I have decided that all examples in this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). For these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results. To further clarify the point system, the mysql command-line tool should be modified. No, not just the end-user database.

There is a small difference in meaning between “should be” and “be” in this context but it is so specific to the context that it is extremely trivial. All the examples that are in the book are written in MySQL so they can be run during startup and then shutdown. the decision to run against MySQL was made before the book was published and the note is not telling the reader that they should run the examples against MySQL; it is telling the reader that they are run against MySQL.

A case could be made for using “should be”, but program examples cannot be successfully run against the incorrect tooling and, therefore, wouldn’t actually run. With programming, the language typically drops the “should” in this context.

I don’t think the author should have included this for that very reason. A common style for these kinds of books is to refer to images, examples and figures as if they live in the future. This style will use “be” as a shortened form of “will be”.

More details on the context are below but the quick answer “should” is not necessary here because the author is intending to convey that the examples will be run in the future, after he creates them.

If a program that operates against a function

means to “run against” something then

it’s the case in MySQL. The relevant word at play is actually “run”: run — to operate or function

Without MySQL, no one will run arbitrary functions?

The choice of “have decided” makes the tenses in the sentence strange, in my opinion, and it seems to flow slightly better by replacing “have decided” by “decided” and “be” by “are/was”:

For these reasons, I decided that all examples for this book are run against a MySQL compiler (Version 5.3); 0) database, and that the mySql command-line tool was used to format query results.

Why is the author referencing the examples as if they hadn’t been written yet, they are in the “future” of the book. When they are eventually “written”, they “will be” run against MySQL. I have decided to

run this book against MySQL. For these reasons I have decided that all examples will be run against a MySQL (version 6). If you revert to 0) database (i.e. any database with an SQL query pending) when the mysql command line tool wont be used to format the query results (I would not consider this your first post).

I will run all example for this book

against MySQL (version 6)… for these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against JSON. (the author just chose to drop the “will” for his book)…. but he (the author) will delete the “will”: 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results.

Here are quick examples of all possible tense structures for this context.

1. They were created in the past (and were presumably run at creation) The
2. examples exist in the present (and could be run now) The
3. examples will exist in the future of the books pages (and will be run at the time of creation) The
4. examples will be run in the future by readers of the book (1)

would say “were run”, (2) would say “are run”, (3) would say “will be run” or “should be run” (4) would say “will be run” or “should be run”.

I suspect that the author is intending to convey (3) and, as such, used “be” in place of “will be”.

I don’t understand what is the difference between BrE and AmE. Can we use thatclause with should or present sv (subjunctive), but one can say that sv is very common in elevated style?

After verbs of volition BrE can use that clause with should or present tense/Present s.v. But in BrE the subjunctive is rare.

I have used the term “verbs of volition” for verbs expressing proposals, suggestions, requests and

orders.

I don’t understand what is the difference between BrE and AmE. Can we use thatclause with should or present sv (subjunctive), but one can say that sv is very common in elevated style?

After verbs of volition BrE can use that clause with should or present tense/Present s.v. But in BrE the subjunctive is rare.

I have used the term “verbs of volition” for verbs expressing proposals, suggestions, requests and

orders.

I have decided that all examples in this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). For these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results. To further clarify the point system, the mysql command-line tool should be modified. No, not just the end-user database.

There is a small difference in meaning between “should be” and “be” in this context but it is so specific to the context that it is extremely trivial. All the examples that are in the book are written in MySQL so they can be run during startup and then shutdown. the decision to run against MySQL was made before the book was published and the note is not telling the reader that they should run the examples against MySQL; it is telling the reader that they are run against MySQL.

A case could be made for using “should be”, but program examples cannot be successfully run against the incorrect tooling and, therefore, wouldn’t actually run. With programming, the language typically drops the “should” in this context.

I don’t think the author should have included this for that very reason. A common style for these kinds of books is to refer to images, examples and figures as if they live in the future. This style will use “be” as a shortened form of “will be”.

More details on the context are below but the quick answer “should” is not necessary here because the author is intending to convey that the examples will be run in the future, after he creates them.

If a program that operates against a function

means to “run against” something then

it’s the case in MySQL. The relevant word at play is actually “run”: run — to operate or function

Without MySQL, no one will run arbitrary functions?

The choice of “have decided” makes the tenses in the sentence strange, in my opinion, and it seems to flow slightly better by replacing “have decided” by “decided” and “be” by “are/was”:

For these reasons, I decided that all examples for this book are run against a MySQL compiler (Version 5.3); 0) database, and that the mySql command-line tool was used to format query results.

Why is the author referencing the examples as if they hadn’t been written yet, they are in the “future” of the book. When they are eventually “written”, they “will be” run against MySQL. I have decided to

run this book against MySQL. For these reasons I have decided that all examples will be run against a MySQL (version 6). If you revert to 0) database (i.e. any database with an SQL query pending) when the mysql command line tool wont be used to format the query results (I would not consider this your first post).

I will run all example for this book

against MySQL (version 6)… for these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against JSON. (the author just chose to drop the “will” for his book)…. but he (the author) will delete the “will”: 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results.

Here are quick examples of all possible tense structures for this context.

1. They were created in the past (and were presumably run at creation) The
2. examples exist in the present (and could be run now) The
3. examples will exist in the future of the books pages (and will be run at the time of creation) The
4. examples will be run in the future by readers of the book (1)

would say “were run”, (2) would say “are run”, (3) would say “will be run” or “should be run” (4) would say “will be run” or “should be run”.

I suspect that the author is intending to convey (3) and, as such, used “be” in place of “will be”.

I have decided that all examples in this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). For these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against a MySQL (version 6.5). 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results. To further clarify the point system, the mysql command-line tool should be modified. No, not just the end-user database.

There is a small difference in meaning between “should be” and “be” in this context but it is so specific to the context that it is extremely trivial. All the examples that are in the book are written in MySQL so they can be run during startup and then shutdown. the decision to run against MySQL was made before the book was published and the note is not telling the reader that they should run the examples against MySQL; it is telling the reader that they are run against MySQL.

A case could be made for using “should be”, but program examples cannot be successfully run against the incorrect tooling and, therefore, wouldn’t actually run. With programming, the language typically drops the “should” in this context.

I don’t think the author should have included this for that very reason. A common style for these kinds of books is to refer to images, examples and figures as if they live in the future. This style will use “be” as a shortened form of “will be”.

More details on the context are below but the quick answer “should” is not necessary here because the author is intending to convey that the examples will be run in the future, after he creates them.

If a program that operates against a function

means to “run against” something then

it’s the case in MySQL. The relevant word at play is actually “run”: run — to operate or function

Without MySQL, no one will run arbitrary functions?

The choice of “have decided” makes the tenses in the sentence strange, in my opinion, and it seems to flow slightly better by replacing “have decided” by “decided” and “be” by “are/was”:

For these reasons, I decided that all examples for this book are run against a MySQL compiler (Version 5.3); 0) database, and that the mySql command-line tool was used to format query results.

Why is the author referencing the examples as if they hadn’t been written yet, they are in the “future” of the book. When they are eventually “written”, they “will be” run against MySQL. I have decided to

run this book against MySQL. For these reasons I have decided that all examples will be run against a MySQL (version 6). If you revert to 0) database (i.e. any database with an SQL query pending) when the mysql command line tool wont be used to format the query results (I would not consider this your first post).

I will run all example for this book

against MySQL (version 6)… for these reasons, I have decided that all examples for this book be run against JSON. (the author just chose to drop the “will” for his book)…. but he (the author) will delete the “will”: 0) database, and that the mysql command-line tool be used to format query results.

Here are quick examples of all possible tense structures for this context.

1. They were created in the past (and were presumably run at creation) The
2. examples exist in the present (and could be run now) The
3. examples will exist in the future of the books pages (and will be run at the time of creation) The
4. examples will be run in the future by readers of the book (1)

would say “were run”, (2) would say “are run”, (3) would say “will be run” or “should be run” (4) would say “will be run” or “should be run”.

I suspect that the author is intending to convey (3) and, as such, used “be” in place of “will be”.