On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Guillaume Lelarge <guilla...@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le 01/01/2011 06:05, Robert Haas a écrit : >> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: >>> On tor, 2010-12-30 at 11:03 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>>> No, quite the opposite. With the other approach, you needed: >>>> >>>> constraints cannot be used on views >>>> constraints cannot be used on composite types >>>> constraints cannot be used on TOAST tables >>>> constraints cannot be used on indexes >>>> constraints cannot be used on foreign tables >>>> >>>> With this, you just need: >>>> >>>> constraints can only be used on tables >>> >>> At the beginning of this thread you said that the error messages should >>> focus on what you tried to do, not what you could do instead. >> >> Yeah, and I still believe that. I'm having difficulty coming up with >> a workable approach, though. It would be simple enough if we could >> write: >> >> /* translator: first %s is a feature, second %s is a relation type */ >> %s cannot be used on %s >> >> ...but I think this is likely to cause some translation headaches. > > Actually, this is simply not translatable in some languages. We had the > same issue on pgAdmin, and we resolved this by having quite a big number > of new strings to translate. Harder one time for the translator, but > results in a much better experience for the user.
Is it in any better if we write one string per feature, like this: constraints cannot be used on %s triggers cannot be used on %s ...where %s is a plural object type (views, foreign tables, etc.). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
