(Just to clarifying the last mail..) At Thu, 05 Dec 2019 12:06:54 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote in > At Thu, 5 Dec 2019 11:36:48 +0900, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> > wrote in > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 03:32:11PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > > It sounds good to me. Message unification (including printf) needs > > > somehow treating trailing new lines, though. About translation > > > burden, I'm not sure how the message unification eases translators' > > > work. Identical messages of different commands appear having different > > > neighbours in different po files. > > > > Newlines are a problem. Still there are cases where we don't use > > them. See for example pg_waldump.c. It seems like it would be first > > interesting to fix the code paths where we know we can reduce the > > duplicates. > > So, (IIUC) do we replace fprintf()s for error reporting together (but > maybe in a separate patch)? > > > > By the way aren't we going to have ereport on frontend? > > > > Not sure that this will happen, there are quite a few things to > > consider related to what error hints and such should be for frontends. > > That's quite a different discussion.. > > Agreed. > > +1 for going that way after having above considerations.
(This might be took wrongly. The following would be clearer.) Since I see the above considertaions, I put +1 for this. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
