Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 23:19:25 -0700 From: "J. Mallett" <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/split split.1 Message-ID: <20020529231925.A75782@FreeBSD.ORG> In-Reply-To: <20020530061403.GA60627@sunbay.com>; from ru@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, May 30, 2002 at 09:14:03AM %2B0300 References: <200205300607.g4U67TN92422@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020529230945.A74704@FreeBSD.ORG> <20020530061403.GA60627@sunbay.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> > On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 11:09:45PM -0700, J. Mallett wrote: > > * From Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> > > > ru 2002/05/29 23:07:29 PDT > > > > > > Modified files: > > > usr.bin/split split.1 > > > Log: > > > mdoc(7) police: use .Fl to denote stdin. > > > > Is this really right? It certainly isn't a flag in the case of: > > diff -u foo - > > > > is it? > > > > Wouldn't .Pa be more appropriate, or something? > > > No, using .Pa wouldn't be more appropriate, as ``-'' isn't a real path. > Current mdoc(7) practices tell us: > > : The `.Fl' macro without any arguments results in a dash representing > : stdin/stdout. What about .Ar then, as this is an explicit argument that a program must grok, it is not handled like a flag, and in fact none of our flag processing stuff handles it, namely getopt(3). Seems to me it's just a special .Ar file ... possibility. Just because it is symbolic doesn't mean it should be notated differently, unless you show all possible usages including where stdin could be used as a file... Doesn't seem right to me... What was the logic in the .Fl macro being used for it? -- J. Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> FreeBSD: The Power To Serve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020529231925.A75782>