Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: raising the bar in language supportRe: raising the bar in language support
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_rockbox.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:01:59 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Manuel Dejonghe wrote:
> why not apply a mechanism that takes advantage of the gcc-preprocessor ?
> I didn't have a look at it, but I am pretty sure the gcc is able to
> ONLY do the preprocessing stuff.
Sure, we already take advantage of that in SOURCES and the .lds files etc.
> With that, strings could be #ifdef-ed like code, depending on features and
> hardware limitations instead of model names.
Yes, but it would not fix all the problems and would make the language files
rather hostile to non-technical people (which translators often are).
The biggest problem it would leave out is how to make "uplang" work. At least
it isn't obvious in my head.
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:01:59 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Manuel Dejonghe wrote:
> why not apply a mechanism that takes advantage of the gcc-preprocessor ?
> I didn't have a look at it, but I am pretty sure the gcc is able to
> ONLY do the preprocessing stuff.
Sure, we already take advantage of that in SOURCES and the .lds files etc.
> With that, strings could be #ifdef-ed like code, depending on features and
> hardware limitations instead of model names.
Yes, but it would not fix all the problems and would make the language files
rather hostile to non-technical people (which translators often are).
The biggest problem it would leave out is how to make "uplang" work. At least
it isn't obvious in my head.
-- Daniel Stenberg -- http://www.rockbox.org/ -- http://daniel.haxx.se/ _______________________________________________ http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockboxReceived on 2005-06-29
Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy