On Mon, 07 Jul 2025 at 19:34, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 5:18 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@kurilemu.de> wrote: >> >> On 2025-Jul-04, Japin Li wrote: >> >> > I've opted to directly use %X/%08X for LSN formatting in this patch, with >> > an >> > accompanying comment near LSN_FORMAT_ARGS. >> >> Thank you! I support this approach and intend to work on getting this >> patch committed soon after some more review, unless there are further >> objections. >> > > I am wondering whether we should question the restriction on using > format macros because of translations. In fact, these format macros > can actually aid translations e.g. if the translation sees LSN_FORMAT > instead of %X/%X, it can use that knowledge to better translate the > message since it knows that it's an LSN instead of two sets of hex > numbers separated by /. If we could devise a prefix which will tell > them that what comes next is a FORMAT for a special datatype, would > the translation system be able to make use of this information. I am > not familiar with the translation system and I might be wrong in > making such an assumption. >
I see that PRI*64 macros, introduced in 15a79c73111, work for both translatable and non-translatable messages. However, I'm unsure how to apply them for LSN formatting. -- Regards, Japin Li
