This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: other/2857: i18n, translations does not work
- To: "Zack Weinberg" <zackw at Stanford dot EDU>
- Subject: Re: other/2857: i18n, translations does not work
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel dot Dos-Reis at cmla dot ens-cachan dot fr>
- Date: 23 May 2001 08:37:22 +0200
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel dot Dos-Reis at cmla dot ens-cachan dot fr>, db at zigo dot dhs dot org, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CMLA, ENS Cachan -- CNRS UMR 8536 (France)
- References: <20010517181757.26122.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com> <20010522110058.I1792@stanford.edu> <flititcgfa.fsf@sel.cmla.ens-cachan.fr> <20010522214307.N1792@stanford.edu>
"Zack Weinberg" <zackw@Stanford.EDU> writes:
| > | I think the appended patch hits all the places that need to get hit,
| > | but maybe Gabriel could take a close look? The tweaks to argument
| > | names enforce the principle that a 'const char *msgid' is either run
| > | through gettext or passed to a function which will run it through
| > | gettext.
| >
| > OK.
|
| Is this an approval?
Yes;
| > Is there a reason why vnotice should go that way (I'm not saying, that
| > is wrong, I'm wanting to know because the long-term plan is to have no
| > (or very few) functions putting text directly into stderr or variants.
| > They should run texts through the machinery.
|
| I took out vnotice because it was only used from fnotice and it seemed
| unlikely that any new users would be created later. If I understand
| you correctly, you confirm this belief.
OK. You're right, of course. Your changes are fine.
-- Gaby