This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] en_CA, es_AR, es_ES: Define yesstr and nostr.
- From: keld at keldix dot com
- To: Petr Baudis <pasky at ucw dot cz>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, libc-locales at sourceware dot org, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 00:48:17 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] en_CA, es_AR, es_ES: Define yesstr and nostr.
- References: <51619965 dot 9030600 at redhat dot com> <20130407210205 dot GX6137 at machine dot or dot cz>
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:02:06PM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 12:05:57PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > My feeling is that this is positive progress on missing data.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> I think it's fine, Acked-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>.
>
> Thank you for the verbose comments. :-)
>
> (Though I'm not particularly fond of having the ASCII contents of the
> datapoint sequence repeated in the comment, as all data duplication adds
> a potential for inconsistencies. Ideally, we would just actually write
> the characters right in the values instead of the codepoints; I didn't
> find any technical reason why to insist on the <U...> syntax for all
> characters. But then again, I'm personally unlikely to gather the
> momentum to do such a change, mainly to verify that it really is 100%
> safe.)
>
> > diff --git a/localedata/locales/es_AR b/localedata/locales/es_AR
> > index c757638..27636e7 100644
> > --- a/localedata/locales/es_AR
> > +++ b/localedata/locales/es_AR
> > @@ -56,8 +56,7 @@ copy "es_ES"
> > END LC_CTYPE
> >
> > LC_MESSAGES
> > -yesexpr "<U005E><U005B><U0073><U0053><U0079><U0059><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> > -noexpr "<U005E><U005B><U006E><U004E><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> > +copy "es_ES"
> > END LC_MESSAGES
> >
> > LC_MONETARY
>
> It seems that es_US also has a local copy. Any reason why not to add
> the copy statement there too?
I think it is OK to copy the es_ES category. But I am not sure the es_ES category is OK
in the first place, given the guidelines I wrote earlier - if these are accepted.
Best regards
keld