Re: [bug-gettext] Generalized Gettext, take two

[Daiki Ueno]

Hi,

Chusslove Illich <address@hidden> writes:

>> I've read quickly through it and while I recognize some legitimate
>> drawbacks of current system, I don't see anything justifying such deep
>> changes.
>
> There are no changes, only additions.
>
>> I don't expect any significant number of projects to migrate and so we'll
>> end up with having to handle both old and new bugs.
>
> The proposed design is such that there is no need for all-out migration.
> Firstly, the complete system can be ignored, and then nothing changes.
> Secondly, ordinary and new generalized calls can be used in the same code,
> which makes it possible to gradually migrate, or to only use the generalized
> call where judged advantageous. Finally, the design is such that all-out
> migration is not that hard either, given that I did this once for three
> million lines of KDE code in about a week span (section 7.1).

You wrote in the last post:

"Practical implementation, I guess, would take form of another library
(incl. language bindings) in the Gettext distribution,"

I guess this would increase the maintenance burden of Gettext.  Does it
really need to be included in the Gettext distribution, rather than
external library (for example, Python's gettext module adds a nice
interface to *gettext function family, but it is distributed in the
Python distribution)?

> As for bugs, as mentioned above, for the past five years I don't recall
> there being a bug reported on the translation system itself, or any
> particular increase in bugs in translation caused by the system.

So, has the translation system already been practically used?

Regards,
-- 
Daiki Ueno