Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> cc'in Matthieu since he wrote the patch.
>
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 4:16 AM, Jakub Narębski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> W dniu 08.11.2016 o 21:12, Karthik Nayak pisze:
>>> From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Introduce setup_ref_filter_porcelain_msg() so that the messages used in
>>> the atom %(upstream:track) can be translated if needed. This is needed
>>> as we port branch.c to use ref-filter's printing API's.
>>>
>>> Written-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Mentored-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Mentored-by: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> ref-filter.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> ref-filter.h | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
>>> index b47b900..944671a 100644
>>> --- a/ref-filter.c
>>> +++ b/ref-filter.c
>>> @@ -15,6 +15,26 @@
>>> #include "version.h"
>>> #include "wt-status.h"
>>>
>>> +static struct ref_msg {
>>> + const char *gone;
>>> + const char *ahead;
>>> + const char *behind;
>>> + const char *ahead_behind;
>>> +} msgs = {
>>> + "gone",
>>> + "ahead %d",
>>> + "behind %d",
>>> + "ahead %d, behind %d"
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +void setup_ref_filter_porcelain_msg(void)
>>> +{
>>> + msgs.gone = _("gone");
>>> + msgs.ahead = _("ahead %d");
>>> + msgs.behind = _("behind %d");
>>> + msgs.ahead_behind = _("ahead %d, behind %d");
>>> +}
>>
>> Do I understand it correctly that this mechanism is here to avoid
>> repeated calls into gettext, as those messages would get repeated
>> over and over; otherwise one would use foo = N_("...") and _(foo),
>> isn't it?
That's not the primary goal. The primary goal is to keep untranslated,
and immutable messages in plumbing commands. We may decide one day that
_("gone") is not the best message for the end user and replace it with,
say, _("vanished"), but the "gone" has to remain the same forever and
regardless of the user's config for scripts using it.
We could have written
in_porcelain ? _("gone") : "gone"
here and there in the code, but having a single place where we set all
the messages seems simpler. Call setup_ref_filter_porcelain_msg() and
get the porcelain messages, don't call it and keep the plumbing
messages.
Note that it's not the first place in the code where we do this, see
setup_unpack_trees_porcelain in unpack-trees.c for another instance.
Karthik: the commit message could be improved, for example:
Introduce setup_ref_filter_porcelain_msg() so that the messages used in
the atom %(upstream:track) can be translated if needed. By default, keep
the messages untranslated, which is the right behavior for plumbing
commands. This is needed as we port branch.c to use ref-filter's
printing API's.
Why not a comment right below "} msgs = {" saying e.g.:
/* Untranslated plumbing messages: */
>> I wonder if there is some way to avoid duplication here, but I don't
>> see anything easy and safe (e.g. against running setup_*() twice).
I think we do need duplication for the reason above.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/