Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 18:44:45 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?
Message-ID: <airjxKXx7aTG8kfE@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="g4o4dywhsw3onu27"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHut+Pu7LWQB+m9HTf4nf3BQu8bC_-N5c=kuOf=EHHZE_Ctj9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/airjxKXx7aTG8kfE%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk


--g4o4dywhsw3onu27
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2026-Apr-24, Peter Smith wrote:

> OK. Including the comma within a larger translated string seems like a
> better idea.
[...]
> Also, why did you choose to implement `last` versus `first` logic?
> e.g. How about this?

In the end I decided to go with the flow and changed to use "first"
logic rather than "last".  I also figured that we should change the
other two places you pointed out at the start of the thread to use the
same coding style.  Since this is mostly cosmetic, I don't feel
compelled to back-patch it, and pushed only to master.

Another place I noticed while looking this over is psql's
describeOneTableDetails(), per the attached patch.  It's essentially
more of the same, but arguably different enough that I judged it
warranted posting before pushing.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

--g4o4dywhsw3onu27
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=0001-fix-some-psql-strings.patch