From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Mon Apr 29 2002 - 17:47:26 EDT
At 10:33 AM 4/29/02 -0400, Dom Lachowicz wrote:
>I've worked out a plan that lets us keep our existing c++ interface in
>place (StringSets and integer string-ids). This will also keep us from
>having to use the translation macros in more than one place.
Cool. That sounds like a perfect way to handle it. I'm looking forward to
seeing how you'll do the refactoring. Specific questions include:
- Will you be able to preserve the current XAP vs AP distinction?
- Does the PO file keep track of its encoding?
- Can the PO file keep track of string IDs for you?
- Where do we specify the "inherit semantics" (en-US vs. en-GB, etc.)?
(Essentially that's all the strings file does now anyways.) If you can
preserve all that behavior, then the wrapper class implementation should be
quite simple, indeed.
>I think that this is a good compromise. It won't affect developers at
>all really, and could greatly benefit translators and our acceptance in
>the international community.
>
>I'm willing to do this work after the branch.
Excellent. Every time I've thought about adding gettext to CVS and getting
it working smoothly on non-Unix platforms with libiconv, I've come up with
more fun ways to spend my time. ;-)
I'm thrilled that you're stepping up to the plate to do so.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 29 2002 - 17:48:20 EDT