Re: [PATCH 0/3] {master} convert the conflict messages to a more bison-like form

[Akim Demaille]

Hi Paul!

Le 24 sept. 2012 à 02:23, Paul Eggert a écrit :

> On 09/23/2012 12:03 PM, Akim Demaille wrote:
>> Are there any evidence that there are languages in which there
>> would be no possible translation like that one?
> 
> "No possible translation" doesn't sound likely, no, as
> a translator can always come up with *something*.  But
> it's plausible that all the possible translations would
> be awkward.
> 
> I hadn't noticed the -Wconflicts-sr versus -Wconflicts-rr
> business, sorry.  But in that case, how about something like
> the following?
> 
>  foo.y: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found, 2 expected [-Wconflicts-sr]
>  foo.y: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found, 0 expected [-Wconflicts-rr]

(in that case that's an error, not a warning)

> That's closer to the format you proposed, and it
> avoids the complexity of ngettext.

My point was precisely that the _translator_ can always
resort to using that kind of translation; my examples were
meant to show that it is certainly always possible to produce
something in any language, but I used English as an example
of an "any" language (No offense meant ;).

So the question is rather to find something that is
nice and pleasant to read for an LC_ALL=C user.  My opinion
as a foreigner, is that #1 below is both natural to
read, and consistent (between the warning, and the error
when %expect is given):

#1
  foo.y: warning: 1 shift/reduce conflict [-Wconflicts-sr]
  foo.y: warning: 2 reduce/reduce conflicts [-Wconflicts-rr]

  bar.y: 1 shift/reduce conflict, expected 0
  bar.y: 2 reduce/reduce conflicts, expected 0

Proposal #2:

  foo.y: warning: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 [-Wconflicts-sr]
  foo.y: warning: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 [-Wconflicts-rr]

(or with found?  It avoid the ambiguous reading that "1"
is sort of a conflict name, rather than a conflict count

  foo.y: warning: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found [-Wconflicts-sr]
  foo.y: warning: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found [-Wconflicts-rr]
)

  bar.y: shift/reduce conflicts: 1 found, 2 expected
  bar.y: reduce/reduce conflicts: 2 found, 0 expected

Given that the ngettext business is already taken care
of, what do you _visually_ prefer to read?  If you
like #2, then let's go for it, but really for a matter
of taste, not for a matter of making it easier to
translate, or easier to implement (less ngettext).