cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/1927197

Hey everyone, check the Linguist

  • you can translate texts offline (with sent no one single byte to a Google and stay private)
  • a lot of features and flexible configuration
  • dictionary + history for learn languages
  • it is are hackable - you can write code to use your own translation service
  • @warmaster
    4•1 year ago

    I didn’t post the original comment, but as I was reading the description noticing the grammar mistakes, and I thought the same thing: if the Dev used his own program to translate from his language to English then the software can’t be any good". Then I thought: “neither Google nor Mozilla would do that, the Dev didn’t use his tool” Then, I came back to the comments to see what was going on.

    Regarding the original comment: It’s just good marketing, If you make a UX/UI design software, then the app itself has to have a good interface. If you make video editing software, the video on the homepage shouldn’t be pixelated.

    Or not. It’s not mandatory, obviously, it’s just a good practice. But yeah, you could leave it as it is, anyone can submit and contribute.

    • @[email protected]
      3•1 year ago

      Translation software is not grammar checking software. It doesn’t improve the grammar of what was written in the original language. I’ve read a few things on the web over the years and there’s a ton of terrible grammar from native writers.

      To be frank, judging the quality of a translation plugin by the grammar of the landing page or of the announcement blog post reflects the ignorance of the judge. It smacks of wanting an excuse to tear down a stranger on the internet. And frankly, it’s privileged bullshit.

      The reaction of the extension’s author tells me everything I need to know about them: “I did my best. If you’d like to submit some improvements, here’s a link to the repository.”

      That is good practice.