Re: i18n, part 2

[Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>]

Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 07:00:10 +0200
> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:51:14 -0700
>>>From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
>>>
>>>The code in question is simply outputting a list of attributes
>>>associated with a particular thread.  How should we make the necessary
>>>context available to the translator without putting an undue burden
>>>on GDB maintainers?
>>
>>I suggested a way to do that.  I don't think it's putting an undue
>>burden on us, but if someone comes with a better idea, I will gladly
>>vote in favor.  Just let's not assume the problem does not exist.
> 
> 
> Could we use an alternate macro for such cases?  This alternate macro
> would take two arguments, one of which is the string to be translated,
> the other.  The other is simply a comment providing context for the
> translators.  Perhaps something like this?
> 
> #define __(str,context_comment) _(str)
> 
> Then, for "suspended" and other such attributes, we could put something
> like this in the code:
> 
>     __("suspended", "thread-id attribute")
> 
> The nice thing about this is that the comment string can contain anything;
> if a translator finds that not enough information is contained in the string,
> they can provides suggestions to us to make it more useful.

When I first asked about i18n on the ``help'' list, it was made very 
clear to me that not just the pot file, but the entire source code 
should be made available.

That way the translators could more easily refer to the source code 
examine any text's original context.

Andrew