On 25.06.2012 18:06, Denis Kudriashov wrote:
Hello.
What is responsibility of environments (russian, japanese) classes.
Why its needed? Why converter classes not enough?
For example, I can write russian text at workspace without setting any
specific russian environment. I only need specific fonts for this.
Novadays, they can be used to read number/date printing policies, decide
which translation package to use, etc. Basically what you'd expect from
an OS locale, but more limited in capabilities.
The part linked to charsets and encodings seem to me an anachronism from
when the OS's used different encodings based on the selected environment
though. (so files would be read and written automatically with the
correct (non-unicode) encoding, and potentially displayed using a
different bitmap font through selection using leadingChar)
2012/6/25 Guillermo Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com
<mailto:guillermopol...@gmail.com>>
Hi guys,
I'm trying to understand the Multilingual packages to get things a
bit more reorganized. This way we can start to have a simpler and
understandable kernel. So,
- We have all environments(greek, chinese, japanese, korean,
russian...) in the same package. Each environment has it's
associated charset, and text converter, which are in different
packages. Also, each text converter has a table of conversions
between unicode and the encoding. But all converters are together,
and all charsets are together.
What about putting related things together? I mean, japanese
converter with japanese environment with japanese charset in one
package. Same with russian, korean, chinese... Does it make
sense? This way we should be able to unload one of them if we do
not really need it.
- MultiByteFileStream and MultiByteBinaryOrTextStream are inside
Multilingual-TextConversion? Even, they do the same on top of a
file or a memory stream of bytes (or they say so in the comment
:^D )...
What about merging them? using a decorator? They have a lot in
common... :/ Put them in a different package?
They are not neatly composed.
Trying to merge them so the methods work with a file and
bytearray/string backend equivalently would probably only make things
even worse.
Using a decorator would be hard, since the MultiByteFileStream method
implementations use alot of its inherited behaviour.
As for putting them in a different package, sure you can peddle crap
around all you want, but that doesn't make it stink any less.
- Just curious. ImmPlugin is working or shipped with vms? Not for
macos, because there is no macos implementation. Then, the class
comment says:
/"On Windows, the plugin is not provided in the shipped VM's, and
its current whereabouts are uncertain.
On Unix, the only implemented behaviour is setting the position
when over-the-spot precomposition of characters is the current mode.
In the VM, the mode is chosen to the first available valid mode
returned by the X Server, so whether this is actually relevant at
all depends on the X Server./"
So, does someone use it and see value on keeping it?
Sure, there is value in neatly integrating OS input methods for composed
characters.
Whether that belongs in a plugin of it's own, and whether what the
plugin currently offers justifies its existence, is a different
question, which I guess the removal was the answer to. :)
To find any potential actual users, I guess you'd have to find a pharo
app localized to the eastern hemisphere and have it ask their linux
users if they appreciate it/if it works.
That, or a developer from the same area who codes in his native language
(which will be hard I think, given arbitrary tool constraints wrt
message names etc.)
Cheers,
Henry
