Most people using gettext get it via their package system. Your library is also an external tool they need to similarly fetch & install.
And no, my argument is not similar to your IDE comparison. You'd get the exact same thing, parsing / compiling when you compile your project. You'd just offload slightly more work to make & the linker.
You can also get access to the parsed version as a datastructure. This is what the gettext library does with its compiled *.mo files.
Anyway, I don't think your thing is a useless approach. It's very hacky in C++ but this sort of thing is the best way to do something like this in many other languages.
I was just pointing out that there's decades of precedence for achieving the same results in C, i.e. parsing some custom language out of the project at compile-time and shipping it with the binary. Which you (with your "what else is there" question) seemed to be unaware of.
And no, my argument is not similar to your IDE comparison. You'd get the exact same thing, parsing / compiling when you compile your project. You'd just offload slightly more work to make & the linker.
You can also get access to the parsed version as a datastructure. This is what the gettext library does with its compiled *.mo files.
Anyway, I don't think your thing is a useless approach. It's very hacky in C++ but this sort of thing is the best way to do something like this in many other languages.
I was just pointing out that there's decades of precedence for achieving the same results in C, i.e. parsing some custom language out of the project at compile-time and shipping it with the binary. Which you (with your "what else is there" question) seemed to be unaware of.