* is the standard "[<options>]", and not "[options]" or other?
@ 2018-05-24 11:45 Robert P. J. Day
2018-05-24 19:15 ` Stefan Beller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2018-05-24 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Git Mailing list
more pedantry -- was digging through "man git-diff" and noticed the
inconsistency in how options are represented. first, in the synopsis,
you see "[options]":
SYNOPSIS
git diff [options] [<commit>] [--] [<path>...]
git diff [options] --cached [<commit>] [--] [<path>...]
git diff [options] <commit> <commit> [--] [<path>...]
git diff [options] <blob> <blob>
git diff [options] [--no-index] [--] <path> <path>
while just below that in DESCRIPTION, it's all "[--options]":
git diff [--options] [--] [<path>...]
^^^^^^^^^^^
a further search produced this from RelNotes/2.7.0.txt:
"A couple of commands still showed "[options]" in their usage string
to note where options should come on their command line, but we
spell that "[<options>]" in most places these days."
so, "git diff -h" does in fact use the allegedly encouraged syntax:
$ git diff -h
usage: git diff [<options>] [<commit> [<commit>]] [--] [<path>...]
$
but should the man pages be updated similarly? i can whip up a patch
for that unless someone wants to comment on this further.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca/dokuwiki
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: is the standard "[<options>]", and not "[options]" or other?
2018-05-24 11:45 is the standard "[<options>]", and not "[options]" or other? Robert P. J. Day
@ 2018-05-24 19:15 ` Stefan Beller
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Beller @ 2018-05-24 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Git Mailing list
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:45 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> but should the man pages be updated similarly? i can whip up a patch
> for that unless someone wants to comment on this further.
Yes, please!
I think [<options>] are the best, as they are pedantically correct.
[--options] is the worst, as there is not such thing as --options.
Thanks,
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-05-24 19:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-05-24 11:45 is the standard "[<options>]", and not "[options]" or other? Robert P. J. Day
2018-05-24 19:15 ` Stefan Beller
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).