harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Salikh Zakirov <Salikh.Zaki...@Intel.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] proposals for VM internationalization
Date Thu, 13 Jul 2006 07:59:15 GMT
Vladimir Gorr wrote:
> In my opinion using the gettext() for the i18n goals will involve too big
> re-factoring of source code.
> I also disagree with the 'no-meaning' for message key. All we need is to
> create the sensible ID for these messages.

I think this is the case of good intentions, which pave the well-known road.
As soon as the message key is *not* the thing that is printed, 
it is inevitable that the message sensible for one engineer, will have no meaning
to the other.

Do you think "K00Ec" is sensible? I think not.
Do you think the developer had no chance to choose better key?
IMHO, this kind of things must be *enforced*, for example, by making
sure that the message key is printed in C locale (default case for most developers).

> *4) Add to this that most of the developers will not know where the
> localized messages are kept,
> and you'll get the situation when most of the messages are not localized in
> any way.
> *
> I'm not sure the gettext() will eliminate this issue.

gettext effectively splits this issue into two *independent* tasks:
- the task of the developer is to code
- the task of the translator is to find translatable messages and translate them

The greatest advantage of it is that developer do not need to care about translations,
besides putting _() occasionally, and translators do not need to care about coding.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message