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] VM internationalization again
Date Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:54:39 GMT
Dmitry,

Dmitry Yershov wrote:
>    Then, one of the following approaches should be chosen:
>        1. Unique localized message is presented by 2 numbers in
> resource bundle (CLASSLIB schema).
>        2. Unique localized message is presented by string in resource
> bundle (see ResourceBoundle class from log4cxx).

If I were you, I would definitely go (2) path of meaningful string keys
in resource bundle.

>    Then, one of the following suggestions should be selected:
>        1. Substitutional parameters in message pattern should be
> presented by printf format specification fields. i.e.: "Message
> pattern with integer parameter: %d".
>        2. Substitutional parameters in message pattern should be
> presented by {i} fields. i.e.: "Message pattern with one parameter:
> {0}".

I think this is unimportant, and we may leave the choice to be driven
by implementation details (i.e. by the back-end that we end up using
for formatting localized messages).


>    And finally, should we introduce new defines in VM (i.e. L7DECHO)
> for internationalization purposes or should redevelop existent ones to
> support internationalization?

I would suggest using a distinct set of defines, though they will not be much
of them, may be

   LINFO2(category, message)
   LECHO(message)

Note, that the option of changing semantics of ECHO and INFO/INFO2 to be
localized still remains available, and we can do that later if we find it
appropriate.

> P.s. One more question is tormented me: Should we internationalize LOG
> and TRACE (they are for debug version of VM only) output?

I agree with Mikhail and Egor that LOG and TRACE should *not* be localized,
as they are not intended for end users.


Mime
View raw message