Re: PRI?64 vs Visual Studio (2022)

Bryan Green <dbryan(dot)green(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/15/2025 11:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... That's
>> colored by seeing that less than half of the buildfarm is finding any
>> variant of es_ES to test in. That's not great, but I'm not seeing
>> anything to be done about it. The only locale names we can be sure
>> will be accepted are C/POSIX, and I'd expect gettext() to
>> short-circuit that case and not look for a translation. I'm thinking
>> though that it's still worth checking that the untranslated string is
>> processed correctly.

> The GNU gettext implementation does not short-circuit that. It still
> goes through the path of trying to find the message catalogue, it fails,
> there is no fallback, messages are untranslated. This is true on Windows
> as well as Linux.

It'd be great to not need the assumption of es_ES being installed.
However, I tried making a POSIX.po file and setting lc_messages to
POSIX, and it didn't work. The msgfmt infrastructure seemed unfazed
and installed a .mo file under $sharedir/locale/POSIX/LC_MESSAGES as
I'd expect, but no translation happened (this on a Linux box). Same
with 'C'. It did work if I set lc_messages to 'C.utf8', which is a
known name according to this box's "locale -a", but this doesn't give
me a warm feeling about this approach being a lot more portable than
what we have. Any ideas?

regards, tom lane