Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> Yes, I would think die_errno() is a no-brainer for translation, since
> the strerror() will be translated.
>
>> apply.c: die(_("internal error"));
>>
>> That is funny, too. I think we should substitute that with
>>
>> die("BUG: untranslated, but what went wrong instead")
>
> Yep. We did not consistently use "BUG:" in the early days. I would say
> that "BUG" lines do not need to be translated. The point is that nobody
> should ever see them, so it seems like there is little point in giving
> extra work to translators.
In addition, "BUG: " is relatively recent introduction to our
codebase. Perhaps having a separate BUG(<string>) function help the
distinction further?
