>> But, nowadays, I still wouldn't use error codes.
>
>I assume you mean by that that you would not have error codes
No. As I explained in an earlier post, I would use
the English text strings as the error codes (and the
key into the translation table). That way, graceful
failure is possible: if the translation is missing or
cannot be obtained, the "error code" still makes sense
in English.
>> This is so obvious, I wonder if it has already been done?
>
>Probably for many multi-language systems.
I was asking if it had already been done for poplog; I
already know it is a common technique for other software.
--jlc
|