This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]
- From: "Martin v. LÃwis" <martin at v dot loewis dot de>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 23:27:15 +0200
- Subject: Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 23:03:45 +0200
From: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
Organization: Antcom
To: Translation Project Robot <translation@iro.umontreal.ca>
References: <1119116608.5065.4.camel@atari>
<20050618203931.2424F234B52@frontal01.iro.umontreal.ca>
Hi,
one of our translators (Roland Stigge) reports a problem with
the new gettext support of GCC formatting routines. In his
file, msgfmt says
>> gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po:22804: 'msgstr' is not a valid GCC
>> internal format string, unlike 'msgid'. Reason: In the directive
>> number 1, the character '1' is not a valid conversion specifier.
The lines in question are
> msgid "Method %qs was defined with return type %qs in class %qs"
> msgstr "Methode %1$qs wurde in Klasse %3$qs mit RÃckgabetyp %2$qs
definiert"
and Roland writes
> This worked before. Why shouldn't it? Please tell me how to work
> around it except not using the n$ feature of standard format
> strings. If GCC implements its own format strings, it should
> at least support the standard feature set.
So the questions are:
- Does GCC support $ reordering of arguments?
- If yes, why does gettext complain?
- If no, shouldn't it?
Regards,
Martin