[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More i18n
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: More i18n |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:09:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
I agree with your comments and fixes and I'll address them soom. Just a
few notes...
Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
> "SuS v2" isn't quite a reason for testing, is it? I think you need a
> few more words here.
I meant that they may not be available everywhere. I should certainly
make it clearer.
> That's a lot of constant definitions! Did you consider the possibility of
> any other approach (e.g. symbols)?
I'm no longer sure it's generally good to use symbol to that end. It
creates secondary name spaces where regular module-based access control
cannot be used.
There's nothing obliging us to use integers for those constants. For
instance, `DAY_1' could be defined as:
(define DAY_1 (cons 'a 'b))
Then, if a piece of code doesn't know (or cannot access) the value of
`DAY_1', it cannot forge it and consequently cannot get the effect of
`(language-information DAY_1)'. This is the same as what happens with
other bindings.
Now, as Kevin said, the names are very C-ish...
>> + c_result = strdup (c_result);
>> +
>> + codeset = (char *) alloca (strlen (tmp_codeset) + 1);
>> + strcpy (codeset, tmp_codeset);
>
> Can we avoid alloca here? We know from another current thread that
> some systems don't seem to have it.
Sure, but `alloca ()' may be faster on most platforms and it avoids
leaks. Isn't it just that we should update the `alloca' blob from the
Autoconf manual?
> That's as far as I've got for now. Does anyone else have a cunning
> way of reviewing a big diff like this? I'm finding it quite slow. It
> would be nicer if epatch or something similar worked, but for me it
> doesn't.
Unfortunately, no.
Thanks!
Ludovic.