Two standard libraries?

[Don Clugston]

Robert Fraser wrote:
> Regan Heath Wrote:
> 
>>>> For example:
>>>>
>>>> "{0} has {1} pieces in {2}"
>>>>
>>>> Could be:
>>>>
>>>> "{supplier} has {stock} pieces in {city}"
>>>>
>>>> and make the translator happy.
>>> How would such identifiers be matched up with variadic arguments?
>> hmm.. Could it match the variable names with the inserts?
>>
>> string supplier = "Bob";
>> string city = "Someplace far far away";
>> int stock = 5;
>>
>> format("{supplier} has {stock} pieces in {city}",
>>    supplier, city, stock);
>>
>> Maybe with some more reflection features it could be possible.
>>
>> Regan
>>
>>
>  
> Well, not even scripting languages keep names of local variables in memory at runtime, so I assume you mean compile-time. That means that the localized properties would have to be known at compile time (via file imports, etc.), which, assuming you store every language in the executable, might lead to some code bloat and a not-so-nimble architecture. But if that's what you're going for, someone demonstrated a while back that this is already possible, via mixins, and will get a lot easier with macros. Search for PHP-style print or something like that (I'm too lazy & limited by BlackBerry bandwidth to  get you the exact link).

That was me. It's true, no new reflection features are required. The difficulty 
is in deciding how it should work, rather than implementing it.
Specifically, what do you do if some of the variables are calculations?
Eg, if stock is (palettesize*numberofpalettes*15) ?
You could do
format("{supplier} has {stock = (palettesize*numberofpalettes*15)} pieces in 
{city}");
But I don't think that's what was intended -- you don't want the translator 
seeing the calculations!

You could have a separate string converting names to indices, but it's starting 
to look clumsy.