Re: Consistent coding for the naming of LR workers

At Thu, 15 Jun 2023 12:42:33 +1000, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> It is better to have a *single* point where these worker names are
> defined, so then all output uses identical LR worker nomenclature.
>
> PSA a small patch to modify the code accordingly. This is not intended
> to be a functional change - just a code cleanup.
>
> Thoughts?

I generally like this direction when it actually decreases the number
of translatable messages without making grepping on the tree
excessively difficult. However, in this case, the patch doesn't seems
to reduce the translatable messages; instead, it makes grepping
difficult.

Addition to that, I'm inclined to concur with Alvaro regarding the
gramattical aspect.

Consequently, I'd prefer to leave these alone.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center