On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
...
>
> c) no duplication of supporting libraries (for example iconv as mentioned by
> Brane)
> d) minimal new code written for Subversion (the desire not to write our own
> gettext implementation comes to mind)
...
> To comment on (3) I must say I agree with Brane that it would be problematic
> if two iconv libraries would be required to get gettext incorporated on
> Windows. This is why I like Sander's idea of adding a libapr_l10n to apr (if
> they want to accept that) to complete the already set of libraries (which
> includes libapr_iconv ofcourse). Brane's desire not to want to link in more
> libraries seemed like an extra argument to go this way. Yet doing so would
> definitely conflict with requirement (d).
>
This idea might be to "reinvent the wheel", but anyway...
When I worked on OpenJade some years ago, we used gettext for l10n, but
not on Windows. INstead, we used a script to put the translations in
Windows resource files. We could do womething similar, and compile each
translation into its own DLL. Then we wouldn't need the gettext runtime at
all. ONe would still need the tools for development however.
Regards,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 19 19:21:02 2004