[PATCH v5] help: mark boolean flags with [no-] to explain that they can be negated (RFC)

Pierre-Yves David pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Wed Sep 28 08:25:27 EDT 2016



On 09/27/2016 11:55 PM, Augie Fackler wrote:
> # HG changeset patch
> # User Augie Fackler <augie at google.com>
> # Date 1473821892 14400
> #      Tue Sep 13 22:58:12 2016 -0400
> # Node ID 7f6af551cbc5394441f62383e5ced5084f59bff5
> # Parent  e83f89d3b1f733d0ee5f23f6a2293279a17fbbfb
> help: mark boolean flags with [no-] to explain that they can be negated (RFC)
>
> That is, help gets tweaked thus:
>
>   global options ([+] can be repeated):
>    -v --[no-]verbose      enable additional output
>
>
> Still an RFC because it's still unclear what we should do. Other
> proposals have included:
>
>   global options ([+] can be repeated, options marked [?] are boolean flags):
>    -v --verbose[?]        enable additional output
>
> and
>
>   global options ([+] can be repeated, options marked [^] are boolean flags):
>    -v --verbose[^]        enable additional output
>
> which avoid the visual noise of the current approach in this change is
> unfortunate, it matches the format I'm used to seeing in man pages and
> similar documentation venues.

I'm confused about this sentence. It seems like some part is missing. 
What is unfortunate? What version is matching the format we are use to 
seeing in man pages?

Cheers,

-- 
Pierre-Yves David


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list