On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:18:06PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > I had a second thought about that: presumably we should make the
> > > function type names translatable. If we do that, it might be better
> > > to make the aggregate case be "aggregate" and take the width hit.
> > > Otherwise translators are going to be puzzled when they come across
> > > "agg" as a translatable phrase.
> >
> > I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using "aggregate"
> > instead of "agg" I don't think it's that great an idea. If you need to
> > notify translators that "agg" stands for "aggregate", add a
> > /* translator: */ comment.
>
> Here's the next revision :)
This time, with less-Byzantine logic, and no egregious whitespace
changes. :)
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
