Re: pg_ctl and -h/help

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_ctl and -h/help
Date: 2013-07-01 22:27:06
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTyUcY4k0iBg0vdbBP2C6bA0ucxKHcm4PV7e72jMCikOQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Agreed --- attached patch applied. I also noticed that we sometimes
> test for -? then --help, but other times do things in the opposite
> order, and the same for -V/--version, so I made that consistent.
>
> However, I also noticed that while we document -? before --help, we test
> for --help before -?, and the same for -V/--version. Should I make
> those even more consistent by always testing for the single-letter
> option first?
I am not sure if this is worth doing for all the binaries, the output
result and the return code being the same in all the cases. Having an
undocumented -h was somehow different because it caused the spec of
pg_ctl and friends to behave differently than what was documented. My
2c.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2013-07-01 22:36:23 Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Nicholas White 2013-07-01 22:20:40 Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls