From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: More i18n Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:09:19 +0100 Organization: LAAS-CNRS Message-ID: <878xhdxyyo.fsf@laas.fr> References: <877iwzokpz.fsf@chbouib.org> <87mz5uqkvx.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: dough.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1165914687 13664 80.91.229.10 (12 Dec 2006 09:11:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 09:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 12 10:11:26 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Gu3fW-0000Sl-C0 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:11:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gu3fV-0002f2-Bf for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:11:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gu3eq-0002FL-GQ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:10:40 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gu3eo-0002El-QG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:10:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gu3en-0002ET-NK for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:10:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.93.0.15] (helo=laas.laas.fr) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1Gu3en-00030g-C4 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:10:37 -0500 Original-Received: from messiaen.laas.fr (messiaen [IPv6:2001:660:6602:0:230:65ff:fed4:9d20]) by laas.laas.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kBC9AY48025151; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:10:34 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: by messiaen.laas.fr (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:09:20 +0100 Original-To: Neil Jerram X-URL: http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 22 Frimaire an 215 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEB1F5364 X-PGP-Key: http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu Mail-Followup-To: Neil Jerram , guile-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87mz5uqkvx.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> (Neil Jerram's message of "Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:42:58 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: -0.001 () NO_RELAYS X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang at CNRS-LAAS on IPv6:2001:660:6602::2 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6315 Archived-At: Hi, I agree with your comments and fixes and I'll address them soom. Just a few notes... Neil Jerram writes: > "SuS v2" isn't quite a reason for testing, is it? I think you need a > few more words here. I meant that they may not be available everywhere. I should certainly make it clearer. > That's a lot of constant definitions! Did you consider the possibility of > any other approach (e.g. symbols)? I'm no longer sure it's generally good to use symbol to that end. It creates secondary name spaces where regular module-based access control cannot be used. There's nothing obliging us to use integers for those constants. For instance, `DAY_1' could be defined as: (define DAY_1 (cons 'a 'b)) Then, if a piece of code doesn't know (or cannot access) the value of `DAY_1', it cannot forge it and consequently cannot get the effect of `(language-information DAY_1)'. This is the same as what happens with other bindings. Now, as Kevin said, the names are very C-ish... >> + c_result = strdup (c_result); >> + >> + codeset = (char *) alloca (strlen (tmp_codeset) + 1); >> + strcpy (codeset, tmp_codeset); > > Can we avoid alloca here? We know from another current thread that > some systems don't seem to have it. Sure, but `alloca ()' may be faster on most platforms and it avoids leaks. Isn't it just that we should update the `alloca' blob from the Autoconf manual? > That's as far as I've got for now. Does anyone else have a cunning > way of reviewing a big diff like this? I'm finding it quite slow. It > would be nicer if epatch or something similar worked, but for me it > doesn't. Unfortunately, no. Thanks! Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel