On lundi 18 septembre 2017 13 h 20 min 25 s CEST Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 09/18/2017 12:26 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> > This patch is for PR target/79868, where some aarch64 diagnostics are
> > said to be not translatable due to how they are implemented. See the
> > bug report for more details on why the current setup of passing
> > the string 'pragma' or 'attribute' doesn't work.
> >
> > This patch fixes it, unfortunately by increasing the number of calls we
> > have to 'error' (16 calls become 32 calls), but that seems to be the
> > most straight forward way to get translatable strings.
>
> I haven't looked at all of them but from the few I have seen it
> seems that rephrasing the messages along the following lines would
> be a way to get around the translation issue and without increasing
> the number of calls (though not without the conditional):
>
> error (is_pragma
> ? G_("missing name in %<#pragma target\(\"%s=\")%>")
> : G_("missing name in %<target(\"%s=\")%> attribute"),
> "arch");
>
> The additional benefit of this approach is that it would also make
> the quoting consistent with what seems to be the prevailing style
> of these sorts of messages. (It would be nice to eventually
> converge on the same style/quoting and phrasing across all back
> and front ends.)
Indeed! That's even better as the message uses words the user sees in the
source code whatever his/her locale language is.
With your proposal, I know I must not translate "target" because it clearly is
part of the programming language. With the former message, I would have
translated "target" as part of the human language message. Your approach is
clearly better.
Frederic
