From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Ryde Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: More i18n Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:58:12 +1100 Message-ID: <87tzygta57.fsf@zip.com.au> References: <877iwzokpz.fsf@chbouib.org> <87vekg2a7a.fsf@zip.com.au> <878xg2tzjz.fsf@chbouib.org> <871wlmwox1.fsf@zip.com.au> <87mz49patg.fsf@chbouib.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1169672324 19883 80.91.229.12 (24 Jan 2007 20:58:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@chbouib.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 24 21:58:41 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H9pCa-00057F-6N for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:58:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H9pCZ-0006FL-NX for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:58:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H9pCX-0006FG-CW for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:58:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H9pCV-0006F4-08 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:58:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H9pCU-0006F1-P6 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:58:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailout2-8.pacific.net.au ([61.8.2.231] helo=mailout2.pacific.net.au) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H9pCT-0003lF-UH for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:58:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (mailproxy1.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.162]) by mailout2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D42710A052; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:58:25 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from localhost (ppp2944.dyn.pacific.net.au [61.8.41.68]) by mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086368C09; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:58:27 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from gg by localhost with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H9pC8-0001wM-Qd; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:58:12 +1100 Mail-Copies-To: never In-Reply-To: <87mz49patg.fsf@chbouib.org> (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?s's?= message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:44:59 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:6485 Archived-At: ludo@chbouib.org (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > > Agreed, but that's only the name of the Info node. Changing it here > would make the line too long for Info. Call the node just "Internationalization" and then call the sub nodes something else, that should fit fine. There's a good chance people coming to such matters for the first time won't even know what "i18n" stands for. >%global-locale > I wondered too. My conclusion is that there's nothing to be afraid of: > after all, it's a special object and we have full control over it > (pretty much like the EOF object, for instance[*]). If someone sets the locale with setlocale from C, does it still work, or does %global-locale get out of sync. Gtk likes to do that for instance. > I think the above Scheme constructs are easier to work > with (to maintain, to add `localeconv' support, etc.) than a C > equivalent. I think you'll find it's easier in C, especially if you have to worry about different combinations of fallbacks in different funcs. > (Besides, I don't think it's very high priority, especially since it > doesn't have any impact on the API itself.) If you can bring it to a high state of polish then you can put it all in 1.8. > What does it buy us to apply `string-append' at the end rather than > `string-append' at each step? string-append at each step means O(n^2) worth of copying (in the string length). That afflicted output string ports until recently. Of course whether anyone should be using a big number there is debatable, but at least we can ensure performance doesn't prevent one from doing so. > I prefer to explicitly specify the encoding of non-ASCII files. But is it non-ascii? _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel