[troad]

Fluent is terrible. I excitedly implemented it in my most recent app, and immediately ran into so many issues.

1) It can transclude variables in translation strings, but these variables cannot themselves be localised. This makes Fluent completely useless for constructions like “Your knight has killed a dragon with a crossbow” in any language with case or gender, unless you pre-translate every possible combination in advance. Which is absurd - the possible combinations almost immediately grow astronomical.

2) The parser is extremely sensitive, and it produces errors which are terse and difficult to debug. Something as basic as a localisation key appearing twice throws an unrecoverable exception.

3) The input files mandate a weird arrangement of new lines for even the simplest branching (e.g. 1 -> cat, 2+ -> cats), which makes them become incredibly difficult to follow. I quickly lost track of my own reference English file - good luck giving them to translator to figure out for any languages with greater grammatical complexity.

4) The documentation is too Spartan to know what happens in edge cases. The word “Fluent” does not restrict language-related web searches in any useful way.

I worked around issue 1 with some ugly nested localisation hacks, but I plan to rip Fluent out before release. It heralds itself to be the saviour of all i18n, but it’s literally worse than the mess that came before it.

[zbraniecki]

Hi! Thank you for your critique!

> 1) “Your knight has killed a dragon with a crossbow”

We have a proposal for dynamic references to address this problem - https://github.com/projectfluent/fluent/issues/80 - it's non-trivial but I hope we'll see it solved in Fluent and/or in MessageFormat 2.

> 2) The parser is extremely sensitive

True. It's on purpose. We wanted to start with strict and loosen, rather than the opposite.

> 3) The input files mandate a weird arrangement of new lines for even the simplest branching

Same as above.

> 4) The documentation is too Spartan to know what happens in edge cases.

We're a small team :)

> It heralds itself to be the saviour of all i18n, but it’s literally worse than the mess that came before it.

I'm sorry to hear it doesn't work for you. I'm relieved that your criticism is seems more subjective except of one missing feature that no other l10n system has as of yet. We'll keep pushing, but if you encounter a better l10n system, please let me know! We're working on Unicode MessageFormat 2.0 based on Fluent and incorporating lessons learned.

[troad]

I wish you guys the best, but I think you’re being a little self-congratulatory here.

The first feature is not optional - it has been a feature of i18n systems since the 1990s, possibly earlier. I’ve seen cludged-together in-house solutions that can do it without breaking a sweat. It is currently not feasible to use Fluent to localise any substantive, dynamic content in languages with case or gender - which is the main challenge an i18n package exists to solve. (I note the issue you link is five years old, dismisses the problem as not significant, and flat out states it is not being worked on.)

Translation files are generally made by translators, not programmers, and the fact that Fluent falls over in a slight breeze makes it difficult to imagine a translator being able to produce working Fluent files. This is not a ”subjective” problem. Translators do not, and should not, work for free. Using Fluent adds considerable (and needless!) complexity and therefore expense.

As you point out, you’re working on a new data format, so it’s unclear why anyone should adopt (and pay for translations in) the current moribund format.

I genuinely do wish you guys the best, and I apologise if I spoke too bluntly above, but it is not merely a matter of personal opinion that Fluent is de facto still in alpha.