On 04/10/21 21.27, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
static const char *object_type_strings[] = {
NULL, /* OBJ_NONE = 0 */
- "commit", /* OBJ_COMMIT = 1 */
- "tree", /* OBJ_TREE = 2 */
- "blob", /* OBJ_BLOB = 3 */
- "tag", /* OBJ_TAG = 4 */
+ /*
+ * TRANSLATORS: "commit", "tree", "blob" and "tag" are the
+ * name of Git's object types. These names are interpolated
+ * stand-alone when doing so is unambiguous for translation
+ * and doesn't require extra context. E.g. as part of an
+ * already-translated string that needs to have a type name
+ * quoted verbatim, or the short description of a command-line
+ * option expecting a given type.
+ */
+ N_("commit"), /* OBJ_COMMIT = 1 */
+ N_("tree"), /* OBJ_TREE = 2 */
+ N_("blob"), /* OBJ_BLOB = 3 */
+ N_("tag"), /* OBJ_TAG = 4 */
};
Are these object type names safe for translating? (e.g. can they be
translatable without affecting private API string, which aren't
translatable)?
+/*
+ * TRANSLATORS: This is the short type name of an object that's not
+ * one of Git's known object types, as opposed to "commit", "tree",
+ * "blob" and "tag" above.
+ *
+ * A user is unlikely to ever encounter these, but they can be
+ * manually created with "git hash-object --literally".
+ */
+const char *unknown_type = N_("unknown type");
+
const char *type_name(unsigned int type)
Did you mean that "unknown type" is generic shorthand?
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
