On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 12:59:28AM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > Colin Watson wrote: > > Furthermore, the style I suggested is used in many other GNU projects. > > Here are just a few examples: > > > > coreutils/src/du.c:994: error (0, 0, "%s", _("invalid zero-length > > file name")); > > diffutils/src/sdiff.c:853: fprintf (stderr, "%s", _("\ > > diffutils/src/sdiff.c-854-ed:\tEdit then use both versions, each > > decorated with a header.\n\ > > glibc/inet/rcmd.c:178: __fxprintf(NULL, > > "%s", _("\ > > glibc/inet/rcmd.c-179-rcmd: socket: All ports in use\n")); > > gnulib/lib/xalloc-die.c:34: error (exit_failure, 0, "%s", _("memory > > exhausted")); > > I have nothing against defining grub_putl_ (str); equivalent to > grub_printf ("%s\n", str); (defined as function if it's used extensively > for space reasons). > Just from your previous mails it seemed that you proposed to transform > strings like > grub_printf (_("Moving file %s to %s."), f1, f2); to grub_printf ("%s %s > %s %s.", _("Moving file"), f1, _("to"), f2); > to avoid translating format-strings which would be completely > untranslatable.
What on earth?! I said nothing of the kind! That would obviously be completely insane. How did you arrive at that impression? My patch made the following transformation: - grub_printf (_("literal string")); + grub_printf ("%s", _("literal string")); This was only necessary in five places, so I doubt that a function is worth it. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel