On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:10:30 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Josh Ockert writes: > > > There's no reason to think that string replacement would cause more > > bugs in the technical sense; however, a bad translation might > > contribute to a higher frequency of user error. > > Windows is better adapted to localization than most operating systems, > because it isolates resources like strings in a way that facilitates > keeping them independent of code. Nevertheless, problems arise. Strings > often grow much longer when translated. Unicode poses special problems. > Buffer overflows are more likely. Formatting messages with variable > fields gets more complex and difficult and harder to debug. And patches > and fixes take longer to get for localized versions; dumps generated in > localized versions are harder to debug, since everything has moved. The > list goes on and on. > > All of these problems are multipled a thousandfold in UNIX and most > other operating systems, where almost all language information is > hard-coded directly into the software. > > Localization makes sense for ordinary end users, but not for IT > professionals. They are vastly better off working in English. > > -- > Anthony > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >
Oh I agree. Actually, my partner in my duo linguistique at the Centre de Linguistique Appliquée (in Besançon) is an IT guy who wants to improve his English. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
