4 ms·

Each folder has a unique ID. The label in the UI is merely a pointer to that ID. So all Gmail has to do when it sees `in:$foo` is map `$foo` to the right intern

by edent 6y ago

Each folder has a unique ID. The label in the UI is merely a pointer to that ID. So all Gmail has to do when it sees `in:$foo` is map `$foo` to the right internal ID based on the interface language. This isn't a new concept in computer science.

namdnay 6y ago
I guess the limitation there would be that you would have mayhem on stackoverflow, with Brits not understanding why a formula posted by an american doesn't work for them :)
- hugh-avherald 6y ago
  But this can happen in plenty of other ways. For example sorting character vectors is dependent on locale. Arithmetic on times too.
  - jan6 6y ago
    I especially hate the way gnu utils treat character groups like [:alnum:] which, if you have utf8 version of a locale, matches characters in ANY unicode language set... so if you, say, grep for numbers in /dev/urandom with a shell script, you can end up with, say, some characters that are technically numbers but in a totally different language, say, arabic, or hebrew...
Frost1x 6y ago
Essentially, you just need a simple mapping system to the actual data. Have labels point to a map that points to the correct data. Probably an oversight or a low priority bug for the Gmail team. Could also be something complicated in the underlying infrastructure that makes it difficult but I see no reason why it couldn't be abstracted and managed in the frontend as part of localization. Its always easier to talk about things and handwave without understanding problems that may cause with other underlying architecture.
- julianlam 6y ago
  You can call them low priority bugs all you want, but Gmail has been around for over a decade and I'm betting their team employs at least 50 developers... Surely one of them could fix it?
  - karottenreibe 6y ago
    It's likely not getting fixed because the opportunity costs are higher than the reward of fixing it: https://erikbern.com/2020/03/10/never-attribute-to-stupidity-that-which-is-adequately-explained-by-opportunity-cost.html https://erikbern.com/2020/03/10/never-attribute-to-stupidity...
    - reaperducer 6y ago
      "Opportunity costs" are very often, as in this case, just an excuse for being too lazy to do the right thing. When people have pride in their work and want to put out a quality product, instead of "optimizing" for pennies, then things get fixed.
londons_explore 6y ago
You haven't thought this one all the way through... Imagine a user names a folder "Bin", which maps to ID 123, and the internal trash folder maps to ID 7, and the user sees as "Trash", because that's their interface language. The user now changes their interface language to England, and suddenly they have two "Bin" labels that map to different sets of things. They behave inconsistently and frustrate anyone who gets into that state. Some messages might even be in "Bin" and "Bin" at the same time! Searching for "in:Bin" returns just one set, or the other, or both. Doesn't really sound like a good solution...
- edent 6y ago
  This depends on who you want to prioritise. How many people use Gmail in a language other than US English? How many people change their UI language and rename folders such that there is a clash? Optimise for where it will have the most impact, and develop a work-around for the minority of users where this causes a problem.
  - emilecantin 6y ago
    > How many people use Gmail in a language other than US English? You'd be surprised. There are only about 400 million native English speakers [0], and Gmail has 1.5 billion users [1]. If we assumed that all native English speakers use Gmail, they'd represent not even a third of the users. Of course, there are many non-native English speakers, but I'd assume a significant fraction of them would prefer to use Gmail in their language. I'd argue i18n has a huge impact, but Google really doesn't optimize for it. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/26/gmail-dominates-consumer-email-with-1point5-billion-users.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/26/gmail-dominates-consumer-ema...
    - danaris 6y ago
      But how many of those "users" are actually unique? I, personally, have 3 "GMail" accounts: one @gmail.com, one @ my own domain, and one for work. So if I were the average English-speaking user of GMail, having every English speaker be a user would pretty much cover the 1.5 billion. (I do not, in any way, think I am the average—I merely seek to point out that it's significantly more complicated to calculate than your post suggests.)

by edent 6y ago

namdnay 6y ago

I guess the limitation there would be that you would have mayhem on stackoverflow, with Brits not understanding why a formula posted by an american doesn't work for them :)

hugh-avherald 6y ago
But this can happen in plenty of other ways. For example sorting character vectors is dependent on locale. Arithmetic on times too.
- jan6 6y ago
  I especially hate the way gnu utils treat character groups like [:alnum:] which, if you have utf8 version of a locale, matches characters in ANY unicode language set... so if you, say, grep for numbers in /dev/urandom with a shell script, you can end up with, say, some characters that are technically numbers but in a totally different language, say, arabic, or hebrew...

Frost1x 6y ago

Essentially, you just need a simple mapping system to the actual data. Have labels point to a map that points to the correct data. Probably an oversight or a low priority bug for the Gmail team. Could also be something complicated in the underlying infrastructure that makes it difficult but I see no reason why it couldn't be abstracted and managed in the frontend as part of localization. Its always easier to talk about things and handwave without understanding problems that may cause with other underlying architecture.

julianlam 6y ago
You can call them low priority bugs all you want, but Gmail has been around for over a decade and I'm betting their team employs at least 50 developers... Surely one of them could fix it?
- karottenreibe 6y ago
  It's likely not getting fixed because the opportunity costs are higher than the reward of fixing it: https://erikbern.com/2020/03/10/never-attribute-to-stupidity-that-which-is-adequately-explained-by-opportunity-cost.html https://erikbern.com/2020/03/10/never-attribute-to-stupidity...
  - reaperducer 6y ago
    "Opportunity costs" are very often, as in this case, just an excuse for being too lazy to do the right thing. When people have pride in their work and want to put out a quality product, instead of "optimizing" for pennies, then things get fixed.

londons_explore 6y ago

You haven't thought this one all the way through... Imagine a user names a folder "Bin", which maps to ID 123, and the internal trash folder maps to ID 7, and the user sees as "Trash", because that's their interface language. The user now changes their interface language to England, and suddenly they have two "Bin" labels that map to different sets of things. They behave inconsistently and frustrate anyone who gets into that state. Some messages might even be in "Bin" and "Bin" at the same time! Searching for "in:Bin" returns just one set, or the other, or both. Doesn't really sound like a good solution...

edent 6y ago
This depends on who you want to prioritise. How many people use Gmail in a language other than US English? How many people change their UI language and rename folders such that there is a clash? Optimise for where it will have the most impact, and develop a work-around for the minority of users where this causes a problem.
- emilecantin 6y ago
  > How many people use Gmail in a language other than US English? You'd be surprised. There are only about 400 million native English speakers [0], and Gmail has 1.5 billion users [1]. If we assumed that all native English speakers use Gmail, they'd represent not even a third of the users. Of course, there are many non-native English speakers, but I'd assume a significant fraction of them would prefer to use Gmail in their language. I'd argue i18n has a huge impact, but Google really doesn't optimize for it. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/26/gmail-dominates-consumer-email-with-1point5-billion-users.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/26/gmail-dominates-consumer-ema...
  - danaris 6y ago
    But how many of those "users" are actually unique? I, personally, have 3 "GMail" accounts: one @gmail.com, one @ my own domain, and one for work. So if I were the average English-speaking user of GMail, having every English speaker be a user would pretty much cover the 1.5 billion. (I do not, in any way, think I am the average—I merely seek to point out that it's significantly more complicated to calculate than your post suggests.)