Re: Replacement of the locales package
> LC_NAME
> -% "%d%t%g%t%m%t%f"
> -name_fmt "<U0025><U0064><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0067><U0025><U0074>/
> +% "%p%t%g%t%m%t%f"
> +name_fmt "<U0025><U0070><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0067><U0025><U0074>/
> <U0025><U006D><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066>"
> name_mr "<U0073><U002D><U0072><U006F>" % "s-ro"
> name_mrs "<U0073><U002D><U0069><U006E><U006F>" % "s-ino"
> @@ -212,5 +212,5 @@
> % "Esperanto"
> lang_name "<U0045><U0073><U0070><U0065><U0072><U0061><U006E><U0074><U006F>"
> lang_ab "<U0065><U006F>" % "eo"
> -lang_lib "<U0065><U006F>" % "eo"
> +lang_lib "<U0065><U0070><U006F>" % "epo"
By the way, while writing a few new locales, I found it very hard
because I followed the above way to represent characters (with Unicode
Hex values).
As I found no dedicated tools for doing so, I wrote the locale with
"gucharmap" openedand editing the locale file with a simple text
editor....with thus a high risk of errors.
Later, I found other locales examples with things like the following
:
(value from fr_FR transposed to the notation I want to enhance)
LC_MESSAGES
yesexpr "<^><[><o><O><y><Y><]><.><*>"
noexpr "<^><[><n><N><]><.><*>"
END LC_MESSAGES
...which is a bit more readable and less prone to errors in the case
of Latin languages at the minimum.
Reply to: