Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:10:30 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mot de passe root Message-ID: <716205443.20050326221030@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <126eac48050326111860f241c1@mail.gmail.com> References: <1334553342.20050325220228@wanadoo.fr> <86psxmiyle.fsf@amidala.datadok.no> <86710893.20050326135216@wanadoo.fr> <20050326151125.GA90180@epia2.farid-hajji.net> <968029093.20050326192627@wanadoo.fr> <126eac48050326111860f241c1@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Josh Ockert writes: > There's no reason to think that string replacement would cause more > bugs in the technical sense; however, a bad translation might > contribute to a higher frequency of user error. Windows is better adapted to localization than most operating systems, because it isolates resources like strings in a way that facilitates keeping them independent of code. Nevertheless, problems arise. Strings often grow much longer when translated. Unicode poses special problems. Buffer overflows are more likely. Formatting messages with variable fields gets more complex and difficult and harder to debug. And patches and fixes take longer to get for localized versions; dumps generated in localized versions are harder to debug, since everything has moved. The list goes on and on. All of these problems are multipled a thousandfold in UNIX and most other operating systems, where almost all language information is hard-coded directly into the software. Localization makes sense for ordinary end users, but not for IT professionals. They are vastly better off working in English. -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?716205443.20050326221030>