Subject: Re: [boost] [locale] Review of Boost.Locale library
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-17 14:40:30
Edward Diener wrote:
> I do not think you can seriously argue that 'translation' from language X
> to language Y is more correct if it must go from language X to language E
> to language Y.
Translation from N source languages to M target languages requires O(M*N)
resources, whereas translation from N source languages to E to M targets
requires O(M+N) resources. Similarly, if you have a world with N languages,
absent a universal second language E, people need to learn N languages to be
able to communicate, and 2 if there exists an agreed-upon E. This is why we
are writing in E in this very mailing list.
In theory, it's more correct to translate from X to Y, but in practice, it's
hard to find people who are simultaneously fluent enough in X software
terminology and Y software terminology to be able to produce a high quality
And in any event, the fact that the source texts are in E shouldn't preclude
your translating from X to Y. You just take the translation text file for X
which is basically a list of (E phrase, X phrase) pairs, and translate the X
phrases to Y phrases. This requires no E knowledge on your part.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk