Hi Danilo and everyone, Am Montag, den 08.01.2007, 11:47 +0100 schrieb Danilo Šegan: > Today at 1:17, Daniel Elstner wrote: > > > Shall I do so? This would require changes to each and every .po file, > > of course. Would it be alright if I do a mass search/replace on all .po > > files myself? (Of course using regexxer itself for the job!) Come to > > think of it, if I do the mass search replace I might as well commit the > > results of intltool-update, no? Please advise, I really don't want to > > disrupt anybody's work. > > Just announcing it on gnome-i18n prior to doing any change (so > translators can commit their unfinished work, and stop doing anything > new) should be enough. And yes, it would be best if you did the > conversion of PO files yourself.
Alright. I'll commit these changes tomorrow, some time after 21:00 UTC. I'll take the pain of reverting changes to a particular .po file if its translator didn't read this message in time; just mail me. > Running intltool-update in such a scenario and committing the results > might as well be acceptable, but I wouldn't worry about it: is there > any particular reason you'd want to run it? Incurable perfectionist silliness. Though one legitimate reason would be to get rid of entries in the .po files for a couple of messages that have been removed, so they don't end up as ghosts in the installed .mo files. > > msgid "" > > "Error in regular expression at \"%1\" (index %2):\n" > > "%3" > > This message doesn't require ngettext call. In general, messages > which have a number attached to a noun or pronoun, and where number is > used for counting (eg. "%1 matches") need ngettext. Okay, thanks for the clarification. Though I was partly talking nonsense anyway: the %1 above actually doesn't reference a number; in fact the message would sound rather strange if it did. Should get some more sleep. > Thanks for the notice :) I also see that those strings are already > marked as qt-format, so even running "msgfmt -c" locally would catch > the problems :) Yeah, I took care of that by passing the right XGETTEXT_OPTIONS via Makevars. > > You can reorder substitutions! This isn't possible with > > standard C89 printf without implementation-specific extensions. > > You could even reference an index more than once or not at all, > > but that probably isn't useful. > > This is possible with POSIX extensions even to C89, so this is a > non-argument :) Yeah, it may look uglier, but that's all there is to > it (%1$s, %2$d...). Hmm, but does e.g. win32 printf() support it? Anyway, at least with regards to g_print() and friends you're right, since GLib ships with gnulib printf replacements. > As far as I see, only 2 messages have %2 in them, and both of them > are of the error message/warning type with %2 being either after > semicolon or in parenthesis (which is hardly suitable for reordering :). Well, you have to understand, I'd sooo love someone to actually use the feature I implemented :) > This is more than appreciated: if all the developers announced their > plans in the same way, and described the technology they use like > this, it would be easier for translators to do their job (well, in > most cases, we have standards on how to do things anyway, so that's > part of the solution :)). Now that's nice to hear. Cheers, --Daniel _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
