From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15636 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2004 17:28:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15609 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 17:28:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 17:28:48 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9RHSldh020414 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:28:48 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9RHSer13035; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:28:41 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58169129D8B; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:27:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <417FDA73.9050606@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20041020) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Baurjan Ismagulov , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: an i18n sample References: <20041024104805.GA2369@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <01c4b9ff$Blat.v2.2.2$1ebcb860@zahav.net.il> <417D76D5.9000105@gnu.org> <01c4bb18$Blat.v2.2.2$62f43fc0@zahav.net.il> <20041026075409.GA21487@ata.cs.hacettepe.edu.tr> <01c4bb94$Blat.v2.2.2$e804d040@zahav.net.il> In-Reply-To: <01c4bb94$Blat.v2.2.2$e804d040@zahav.net.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00453.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:54:11 +0300 >>From: Baurjan Ismagulov >> >>That is why what I am working at right now is rewriting the output >>within the function scope and leaving issues requiring global changes >>for later. Thus, the first stage can be done relatively quickly and with >>better quality than just with s/"\([^"]*\)"/_("\1")/g. I think this is a >>reasonable compromise. > > > That's a very good plan which I fully support. Thanks!