CVS: main/help help_mp-en.h,1.190,1.191
CVS change done by Diego Biurrun CVS Update of /cvsroot/mplayer/main/help In directory mail:/var2/tmp/cvs-serv25182 Modified Files: help_mp-en.h Log Message: -vc null -vo null is not the fastest way to dump... Index: help_mp-en.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/mplayer/main/help/help_mp-en.h,v retrieving revision 1.190 retrieving revision 1.191 diff -u -r1.190 -r1.191 --- help_mp-en.h 18 Oct 2005 19:58:33 -0000 1.190 +++ help_mp-en.h 20 Oct 2005 00:08:09 -0000 1.191 @@ -1018,7 +1018,7 @@ // ao_pcm.c #define MSGTR_AO_PCM_FileInfo "[AO PCM] File: %s (%s)\nPCM: Samplerate: %iHz Channels: %s Format %s\n" -#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: fastest dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n" +#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: Faster dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n" #define MSGTR_AO_PCM_CantOpenOutputFile "[AO PCM] Failed to open %s for writing!\n" // ao_sdl.c
Diego Biurrun CVS wrote:
// ao_pcm.c #define MSGTR_AO_PCM_FileInfo "[AO PCM] File: %s (%s)\nPCM: Samplerate: %iHz Channels: %s Format %s\n"
I forget - do we still consider "samplerate" to be valid? We've split up other neologistic compound words before (the one which comes to mind is "bugreport"), and though I don't necessarily agree with that I do think we should probably be consistent.
-#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: fastest dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n" +#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: Faster dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n"
It seems to me that if you're going to capitalize the word after "Info:" in one case, you should probably capitalize it in both cases. Also, it seems a little strange to have "[AO PCM] Info:" in one case, and "PCM: Info:" in the other; unless there's some reason to do them differently, I think they should probably be brought into parallel. -- The Wanderer Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any side of it. Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:24:06PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
Diego Biurrun CVS wrote:
// ao_pcm.c #define MSGTR_AO_PCM_FileInfo "[AO PCM] File: %s (%s)\nPCM: Samplerate: %iHz Channels: %s Format %s\n"
I forget - do we still consider "samplerate" to be valid? We've split up other neologistic compound words before (the one which comes to mind is "bugreport"), and though I don't necessarily agree with that I do think we should probably be consistent.
-#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: fastest dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n" +#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: Faster dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n"
It seems to me that if you're going to capitalize the word after "Info:" in one case, you should probably capitalize it in both cases.
Also, it seems a little strange to have "[AO PCM] Info:" in one case, and "PCM: Info:" in the other; unless there's some reason to do them differently, I think they should probably be brought into parallel.
Feel free to fix. Diego
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:22:38AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:24:06PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
Diego Biurrun CVS wrote:
// ao_pcm.c #define MSGTR_AO_PCM_FileInfo "[AO PCM] File: %s (%s)\nPCM: Samplerate: %iHz Channels: %s Format %s\n"
I forget - do we still consider "samplerate" to be valid? We've split up other neologistic compound words before (the one which comes to mind is "bugreport"), and though I don't necessarily agree with that I do think we should probably be consistent.
-#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: fastest dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n" +#define MSGTR_AO_PCM_HintInfo "[AO PCM] Info: Faster dumping is achieved with -vc null -vo null\nPCM: Info: to write WAVE files use -ao pcm:waveheader (default).\n"
It seems to me that if you're going to capitalize the word after "Info:" in one case, you should probably capitalize it in both cases.
Also, it seems a little strange to have "[AO PCM] Info:" in one case, and "PCM: Info:" in the other; unless there's some reason to do them differently, I think they should probably be brought into parallel.
Feel free to fix.
Wanderer, what happened to your CVS account? ;) Diego
Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:22:38AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:24:06PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
It seems to me that if you're going to capitalize the word after "Info:" in one case, you should probably capitalize it in both cases.
Also, it seems a little strange to have "[AO PCM] Info:" in one case, and "PCM: Info:" in the other; unless there's some reason to do them differently, I think they should probably be brought into parallel.
Feel free to fix.
Wanderer, what happened to your CVS account? ;)
It's still there AFAIK - I just haven't gotten to this. (There are several different things I could bring up as excuses, but I'm not particularly comfortable making excuses unless I feel it's important.) I keep putting off one thing after another, and getting to a few here and there, and building up a backlog in several different contexts... and then the sheer size of the job of wearing down the backlog leaves me less interested in getting started unless I happen to be feeling particularly inspired. I'm about to be late leaving for work, so I'll drop this for now - but I'll get back to it when I get the opportunity. -- The Wanderer Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any side of it. Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
participants (3)
-
Diego Biurrun -
syncmail＠mplayerhq.hu -
The Wanderer