Re: finding unused translations / strings ...

Hi Michael,
Hi Caolán,

yes, I will do this :) Starting next week.

Thomas


On 06/12/2012 10:56 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 23:10 +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> > > - STR_DOC_LOADING and STR_CHAIN_OK were unused. They are represented in
> > > many po files. Is there an easier way to remove them or only per regex/sed?
> >
> > Stuff in .po files I think basically "take care of themselves", but
> > maybe Andras can give the right answer for that. I *presume* there's a
> > form of garbage collection taking place there so that translations of
> > removed stuff doesn't continue forever.
>
>         Yep - the only problem is that there is no link between the code
> dropping a string usage, and leaving it around forever to be constantly
> translated. It is quite possible that some small %age of our strings are
> simply never used & just waste translators time.
>
>         I just thought about this a bit ... and hacked up a very quick shell
> nasty:
>
> $ for a in `git grep String | grep \.src | grep -e '[RSH]ID_' | \
>              sed 's/^.*[RSH]ID_/ID_/' | sed 's/[  {=].*$//' | sort | uniq`; \
>    do echo -n "$a " ; (git grep $a | wc -l); done
>
>         Not a perfect guide and of course it could be lots cleaner ;-) As a
> finger-in-the-air guide though it's prolly reasonable.
>
>         If the count is '2' or lower for hits - then (quite probably) the
> string is either unused - or it is one of those gross cases Caolan
> pointed out (which probably need identifying and strangling carefully
> anyway). So eg.
>
> ID_BEZIER_TOOLBOX       11
> ID_BIB_STR_FIELDSELECTION       2
> ID_BIB_STR_FRAME_TITLE  3
> ID_BIB_STR_TABWIN_PREFIX        2
>
>         ID_BIB_STR_FIELDSELECTION and ID_BIB_STR_TABWIN_PREFIX bear some
> further investigation. Given that RID_BIB_STRING and RID_BIB_START are
> not mentioned in arithmetic outside the .hrc file - I suspect we could
> happily loose these (eg.)
>
>         If someone is looking for cleanups - those sound like they might be a
> fruitful place to start :-) are you interested Thomas - or should I file
> an easy-hack ?
>
>         HTH !
>
>                 Michael.