Re: [boost] i18n for streams (Was: Re: formatting manipulator for UTF-8)

From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-24 12:04:36

It seems to me that the discution is getting nowhere because 
you keep repeting that the string database is easier to deal 
w/o clearly explainning why. You keep using negative words like 
``digging through the code'' or ``track down''. These phrases 
add nothing to the debate and using them does _not_ constitute 
an argument. Saying that your approach is simplier doesn't 
constitute an argument either: you need to say why it is simplier.

Karl Nelson wrote:

> > > Number 3 is just a pain in the ass because you must make for total
> > > isolation of algorithm and input/output.  This is good practice though
> > > to the extent of total separation is a bit extreme.  You still
> > > have the problem of having to sync the functions in the many versions
> > > of the shared libraries.
> >
> > You still have to sync the formating strings in the different
> > databases.
> 
> Syncing database strings is easier because when you change a
> string used by your program it nolonger has a translation.  Thus
> when you rebuild the database it tells you that you need translations
> for these strings.  No digging through the code to find out where
> they are or why they changed.  It is now a matter for a translator
> not a coder.
> 
> 
> > > So if you need to add an extra argument to
> > > be displayed that means changing 5 pieces of code.
> >
> > You still have to change 5 formating strings. I don't understand
> > why it is easier.
> 
> In the shared library approach if I need to add an argument to
> 
>    void print_greetings( string name );
> 
> to make it
> 
>    void print_greetings( string name ,string date);
> 
> I need to track down all the code in 5 places and change
> both the print_greatings function and the place that envolves
> dealing with the output. 

I don't think that adding 

  << date

5 times to 

  cout << whatever

is any harder than adding 

  %s

5 times and 

  << date

once to

  format (whatever) << whatever

> With gettext, you only have one
> piece of code so changing it changes once, and when you
> deal with straighening out the database it gets much simpler.

Again, why is it simplier ?

The code in the shared lib will be a list of simple and trivial 
functions like:

  cout << "Cannot get file " << file_name 
       << " because " << error << endl;

> > With my proposed solutions (1 to 3), the formating is indeed handled
> > in the locale-dependant part.
> 
> One code base handling many languages is better than many
> code bases for many languages.  That is the priciple of
> maximum reuse. 

One string database is better than many string databases (one 
per language). So keep all programs in English for maximum 
reuse of the English language. ;-)

> Since following the approach of not having
> a format doesn't really contribute to boost, I don't see
> a point in discussing all the ways that i18n can be done without
> a format function. 

My contribution is the idea that we shouldn't hav any formating 
class in boost. In other words, it's a negative contribution.

> There is one method of i18n which uses
> format and some people wish to use it so I intend to contribute
> a class to assist in that effort.

I have also proposed a class I have written to do that.

-- 
Valentin Bonnard