Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see nothing wrong or nonstandard with Indian English, as a native US English speaker living in Canada myself. Are you going to claim that Canada uses nonstandard English simply because it's a hybrid of US and UK English with a few phonetic and lexical twists of its own? Or that Scottish English is somehow less legitimate than England's English (the two are quite different) despite Scotland being part of the UK for…
> I see nothing wrong or nonstandard with Indian English, as a native US English speaker living in Canada myself. I try to see it from the perspective of a non-native speaker trying to learn English. If I know no English, and pay for teachers to teach me English, I definitely do not want to be taught Indian English. Not because it's wrong, not because it's $whatever_adjective, but because it will sound incorrect to t…
Same thing if you were a call center representative communicating in English with Indian audiences.
As for non-native English speakers, there are already some choices to make when deciding what to learn. If someone learns US English as a second language, they'll find it a lot harder to understand people from the UK, especially less globally common styles like those in Scotland and Northern Ireland. But if someone learns British English, they'll probably find those styles easier to understand than Louisiana or Newfoundland English, to name two less standard North American varieties. (Cockney is especially difficult to understand for non-native speakers of any kind, so I'm leaving it out of this.)
In this case, we're discussing an Indian commenter's choice to use their local dialect of English when discussing a topic about Indian tech companies with a global English-speaking audience.
Yes, I admit I thought "codes" was wrong when I first read the comment, but that's because I didn't know that aspect of Indian English, and I no longer view it as wrong. Anyway, it didn't detract from my interest in or respect for the commenter's substantive opinion.