From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2881 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2009 16:48:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 2864 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Oct 2009 16:48:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:48:27 +0000 Received: (qmail 27391 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2009 16:48:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 14 Oct 2009 16:48:25 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com Subject: Re: [v8] multi-executable support Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:48:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Joel Brobecker References: <200910051659.20885.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200910141615.57994.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910141748.28719.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00305.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 14 October 2009 17:24:21, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> Any suggestions? Assuming languages have only singular and one > Pedro> plural form [if (n == 1) else ...] is frowned uppon as well. > Pedro> "1 inferior(s) added." ? > Pedro> "Added 1 inferior(s)." ? > Pedro> Just drop the sentence? > > gettext has support for this. See (info "(gettext)Plural Forms"), > specifically the "ngettext" function. > > In this case I think you would write: > > printf_filtered (ngettext ("%d inferior added.\n", "%d inferiors added.\n", > copies), > copies); > Thanks, had seen that. I had noticed that gdb_locale.h doesn't wrap ngettext, and GDB doesn't use it anywhere, so I just perhaps wrongly assumed that ngettext would be missing on some non-GNU gettext implementations. In any case, I'm not concerned that users will miss the sentence, so I'll just drop it. > Glancing at the patch it seems to be missing some _() calls in this > area. Eh, indeed. I'll go through the patch to see if more are missing. Thanks. -- Pedro Alves