On 04.11.22 23:08, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> Ok, I can definitely improve the comments for that function.
>
> Also consider describing in the commit message what you are doing in
> more detail, including some of the things that have been discussed in
> this thread.
>
> Going through the thread for the commit message, I think that maybe the
> collation naming remarks were not properly addressed. In the current
> version the collations retain their native name, but an alias is created
> for those with a shape that we can assume a POSIX equivalent exists.
This looks pretty good to me. The refactoring of the non-Windows parts
makes sense. The Windows parts look reasonable on manual inspection,
but again, I don't have access to Windows here, so someone else should
also look it over.
A small style issue: Change return (TRUE) to return TRUE.
The code
+ if (strlen(localebuf) == 5 && localebuf[2] == '-')
might be too specific. At least on some POSIX systems, I have seen
locales with a three-letter language name. Maybe you should look with
strchr() and not be too strict about the exact position.
For the test patch, why is a separate test for non-UTF8 needed on
Windows. Does the UTF8 one not work?
+ version() !~ 'Visual C\+\+'
This probably won't work for MinGW.
