Re: [RFC] Should I embed or parameterize syscall/Win32 function names from error messages?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Should I embed or parameterize syscall/Win32 function names from error messages?
Date: 2017-02-06 06:09:10
Message-ID: CAB7nPqR7mWJBFqHSPZj1LrhNbF+9V-6eep=P7=uTnJLKRda8ug@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
<tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm rather inclined to choose Option 1 to reduce message translation work. Actually, is the Option 3 the best so that it aligns with the existing messages by putting the error code in the primary message?

I find it hard to have an opinion on the matter as a non-translator.
Why not asking translators directly on pgsql-translators?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rushabh Lathia 2017-02-06 06:09:42 Re: Gather Merge
Previous Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2017-02-06 05:56:14 [RFC] Should I embed or parameterize syscall/Win32 function names from error messages?