Re: [PATCH] PRItime: wrap PRItime for better l10n compatibility

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1539 bytes --]

Hi Junio,

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 21 Jul 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> Jean-Noël Avila <jn.avila@free.fr> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Le 20/07/2017 à 20:57, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> >> >>
> >> >> +	git diff --quiet HEAD && git diff --quiet --cached
> >> >> +
> >> >> +	@for s in $(LOCALIZED_C) $(LOCALIZED_SH) $(LOCALIZED_PERL); \
> >> >
> >> > Does PRIuMAX make sense for perl and sh files?
> >> 
> >> Not really; I did this primarily because I would prefer to keep
> >> things consistent, anticipating there may be some other things we
> >> need to replace before running gettext(1) for other reasons later.
> >
> > It would add unnecessary churn, too, to add those specific exclusions and
> > make things inconsistent: the use of PRItime in Perl or shell scripts
> > would already make those scripts barf. And if it is unnecessary churn...
> > let's not do it?
> 
> Sorry, but I cannot quite tell if you are in favor of limiting the
> set of source files that go through the sed substitution (because we
> know PRIuMAX is just as nonsensical as PRItime in perl and shell
> source), or if you are in favor of keeping the patch as-is (because
> changing the set of source files is a churn and substitutions would
> not hurt)?

I was in favor of keeping the simplest strategy: simply cover all files,
including Perl and Unix shell scripts. It would not bring any benefit to
exclude them.

Ciao,
Dscho