Subject: Re: [boost] [locale] Review results for Boost.Locale library
From: Brent Spillner (spillner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-24 06:46:11
On 24 Apr 2011 14:06 Ryou Ezoe wrote:
>Believe me, There are so many Boost users who don't know English at all.
>They are good at using Boost library because there are enough translations.
And why would this library, designed to support international users,
be any different?
>This English-dependent library cannot be used by these users.
>They CAN use English identifier in the source file. like name of
>functions, classes, variables etc(badly If you ask me)
>But text is written in their language.
>There is no way they use English text.
>The text in software is not just written by programmer alone.
>Non-programmers also write text.
>So this library requires English for anybody.
What are you proposing, a library where the identifiers and keys are
all in Japanese? Esperanto? Perhaps all comments should be
replicated in the ~20 most commonly-used languages so that non-English
speakers can not just use the library, but also contribute?
Artyom has created an internationalization library, not the magic
translator box from Star Trek.
>That means, if everybody can use this English-dependent library, the
>purpose of this library, the localization, is unnecessary.
If non-English speakers can't use English-centric internationalization
tools, where are the competitors for gettext and ICU?
>Blaming people for not to use English doesn't work. They don't care.
>Just like you don't care their language.
For someone who purportedly doesn't care about non-English speakers,
Artyom certainly went to a lot of trouble to create an
internationalization library. I'm sure we'd all agree that it's
unfortunate that some familiarity with English is a requirement to use
almost any programming language, library, or toolchain, which is an
additional burden for the millions of non-native-English-speaking
programmers and aspiring programmers out there. But that's due to a
confluence of historical, economic, and compatibility reasons, and has
nothing to do with this library. In fact, by making
internationalization easier, Boost.Locale will over time likely
/increase/ the number of software tools that people can use in their
native languages. Your criticism is entirely misplaced.
Brent