Re: psql patch
От | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 45082F7F.6050107@lelarge.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psql patch (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane a ecrit le 13/09/2006 18:05: > Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> writes: >> diff -r1.89 print.c >> 853c853 >> < snprintf(record_str, 64, "* Record %lu", record++); >> --- >>> snprintf(record_str, 64, _("* Record %lu"), record++); >> 855c855 >> < snprintf(record_str, 64, "[ RECORD %lu ]", record++); >> --- >>> snprintf(record_str, 64, _("[ RECORD %lu ]"), record++); > > Hm, these strings were never localizable in previous versions; if we > make them so, do we risk breaking any code that examines psql output? > Don't know but I always thought tools shoudn't rely on strings output. > What about the equivalent headers in the other output formats? > Which one ? can you give me an example ? Regards. -- Guillaume.
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: