> [: Chusslove Ilich :]
> I can give you some numbers on current trunk/l10n-kde4/ POs:
>
> === Statistics by words ===
> Total: 917230
> [...]
> Total would-be unique without context at all: 816322 (+12.4% growth)
Sorry, this number is bogus. Here messages were compared across PO files
too
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101575/#review4509
---
Looks good already, just a couple of API nitpicks.
kdeui/widge
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101859/#review4507
---
This review has been submitted with commit
eed6cc4bf2773cadabda
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101859/#review4506
---
This review has been submitted with commit
998af6833721467e2928
On Thursday 07 July 2011, Chusslove Illich wrote:
...
> What current library's Qt integration, that wouldn't be present in the
> standalone library? How would the implementation be less lightweight?
>
> I agree that few will want to pull in QtCore and QtScript just to be able
> to use this library
>> [: Chusslove Illich :]
>> [...] "they" weren't seriously thinking about disambiguation at all.
>
> [: Oswald Buddenhagen :]
> that's not entirely fair or even accurate.
Granted that I am assuming too much (maybe you're dealing with a vigilant
bunch), but in most scenarios I'd expect to be right
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101800/#review4495
---
Ship it!
nice :) thanks for improving this ...
- Aaron J.
On
> [: Oswald Buddenhagen :]
> so in summary, you think we *should* go for semantic highlighting if the
> problems can be adequately solved, yes?
That is the summary, yes. But what I would want to make it adequate may be
too heavyweight, while the lightweight solutions you propose I don't
consider a
