Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?

From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?
Date: 2026-06-11 16:44:45
Message-ID: airjxKXx7aTG8kfE@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2026-Apr-24, Peter Smith wrote:

> OK. Including the comma within a larger translated string seems like a
> better idea.
[...]
> Also, why did you choose to implement `last` versus `first` logic?
> e.g. How about this?

In the end I decided to go with the flow and changed to use "first"
logic rather than "last". I also figured that we should change the
other two places you pointed out at the start of the thread to use the
same coding style. Since this is mostly cosmetic, I don't feel
compelled to back-patch it, and pushed only to master.

Another place I noticed while looking this over is psql's
describeOneTableDetails(), per the attached patch. It's essentially
more of the same, but arguably different enough that I judged it
warranted posting before pushing.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-fix-some-psql-strings.patch text/x-diff 1.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Salma El-Sayed 2026-06-11 17:25:10 Re: [GSoC 2026] - B-tree Index Bloat Reduction - Approach & Questions
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2026-06-11 16:08:49 Re: Heads Up: cirrus-ci is shutting down June 1st