Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Hpmh, if it is OK to assume that in all human languages it is OK to
>> express the reate as <number> followed by translated "per second",
>> without allowing the order from getting changed, then ...
>
> Probably not (but I don't know any language that is not ok with this).
> I would just add strbuf_humanise_rate() that prints "GiB/s",
> "MiB/s"... Then we probably should print "bytes/second". This will
> print "bytes/s" which looks just weird.
>
>> > if (bytes > 1 << 30) {
>> > - strbuf_addf(buf, "%u.%2.2u GiB",
>> > + strbuf_addf(buf, _("%u.%2.2u GiB"),
>> > (unsigned)(bytes >> 30),
>> > (unsigned)(bytes & ((1 << 30) - 1)) / 10737419);
>>
>> wouldn't it make more sense to split GiB, MiB, KiB and "bytes" units
>> out of these messages, and ask only these unit names, without the
>> %u.%2.2u number formats, to get translated by the localization team?
>
> That assumes all languages will print the unit after the number. I
> guess that is ok and it helps share code if we add
> strbuf_humanise_rate() above because only the unit part changes.
I think this is the direction I expected the discussion to go in.
It seems that the other subthread went the other way, though.
