Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue ago 09 12:40:08 -0400 2012: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> If we do go with the %s-for-a-SQL-keyword approach, it would then become > >> tempting to force-fit all of the cases into that style. > > > I don't really like this, though. I don't think an error cursor is a > > good substitute for a clear statement of the categorical rule; or to > > put that another way, I think that forcing all of those messages into > > this model is going to be awkward. > > Fair enough. I was not sold on doing that either. I would still like > to know if it's okay to use one string with %s for the cases where > there's not a good reason for the "context" to be more than just a > SQL keyword. That would save a few lines of code and also reduce > the number of strings for translators to deal with; so if it's not > horrid from a translation-quality standpoint, it seems worth doing.
Yes, that part seems to work fine -- at least I haven't seen any translator complaining. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
