[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla bash completion
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla bash completion |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Sep 2003 12:45:59 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:
> >> I agree; -v, -vv, etc might serve as alternatives.
>
> Tom> -vv would violate the conventions for option syntax. --vv
> Tom> would be better, and --very-verbose would be better still.
> Tom> (If it's needed at all.)
> Some programs give an argument to -v (actually, more typically to -d,
> --debug-level). Others count the number of -v's, increasing verbosity
> with repetition.
I get tired of repeating this but I will at least one more time:
Option arguments must not be optional.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla bash completion,
Tom Lord <=