|
|
|
|
|
|
by junon
1739 days ago
|
|
|
> You don't write new code when you i18n something, you just create dictionaries. No. i18n is not that easy, sorry. I wish it were. To be frank, this answer reads as though it was written by someone who has not done any extensive i18n work in their life. Languages are not 1:1 translatable. This goes beyond words and phrases - numbers, math, time, dates, names, grammar, etc. are all completely unrecognizable between certain languages. It's not a problem that even regular software has solved generically and elegantly, and then going on to apply it to programming language design is a completely different beast, with its own set of problems. |
|
|
I argue that i18n is not translation.
It seems like you're making a point for solving problems beyond the scope of PL internationalization, including problems that are not solved when it comes to how english code translates to english natural language.
My original point is that foreign excel versions already did help people. From there, improving compilers to make that work easier and less costly is a reasonable goal, or at least a tractable one. Some of that work is already being done for unrelated reasons (e.g. modern compilers offer interfaces for LSPs as well as error messages in formats that allow processing beyond reading for CIs — both of these changes benefit potential i18n efforts).