On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I hear you about reusing existing code, but I think there are a number of code reasons to use msgcat:
- it is a widely used standard, so its well documented (esp. compared
to our code ;)
So, do you really think that Tcl's GetText 'format' is being used at all outside of Tcl? It's not like it's the same format as used in GNU GetText.
Considering Tcl's msgcat is listed in the official GNU gettext manual as "fully portable", I think it is safe to say yes:
http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/gettext/Tcl.html
- there are existing tools to make translating easier
Which tools? Never heard of them.
Here is one: http://www.gted.org/
- a well debugged and optimized library
Do you need a well debugged and optimised library for accessing a hashtable when the language already has commands for accessing hashtables freely?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal, Québec
Do you really think that accessing a hashtable is all there is to localization? How about parsing the names of the locales (en_US, en_US.UTF-8, en_GB, etc.)? That is non-trivial and handled by msgcat, as are many other things we haven't thought of, but the people who have been working on gettext/msgcat since
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrorism is not an enemy. It cannot be defeated. It's a tactic. It's about as sensible to say we declare war on night attacks and expect we're going to win that war. We're not going to win the war on terrorism. - retired U.S. Army general, William Odom