Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!uhccux!munnari.oz.au!brolga!uqcspe!cs.uq.oz.au!warwick
From: warwick@cs.uq.oz.au (Warwick Allison)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: standard practices
Message-ID: <352@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
Date: 21 Mar 91 23:42:25 GMT
References: <1991Mar20.204257.26740@convex.com> <324@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <1991Mar21.065817.1799@convex.com>
Sender: news@cs.uq.oz.au
Reply-To: warwick@cs.uq.oz.au
Lines: 66

In <1991Mar21.065817.1799@convex.com> rosenkra@convex.com (William Rosencranz) writes:


>In article <324@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> warwick@cs.uq.oz.au writes:
>>In <1991Mar20.204257.26740@convex.com> rosenkra@convex.com (William Rosencranz) writes:
>>>it would be really nice if unix-like programs on the ST (or anywhere, for
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>i was not refering to gem stuff. and nor would i assume people who prefer
>gem are "_potentially_ dim wits". to each his own...

I only meant GEM programs are easier to use.  I PREFER GEM for complex programs,
and command line for simple, repetitive commands.

>Doing "cc -help" and getting the info in a very terse, concise way is
>much faster than using man and wading thru pages of docs. i work mostly
>from home at 2400 baud. and believe me, reading man pages is no great joy.

	Huh?  Are we using ST's or University computers here?  Or are we
writing portable code or WHAT?

>having a "-help" option in no way hurts my (sizable) ego. in fact, just
>the opposite: i would call the programmer considerate for not making me
>try to remember every single scrap of information without openning a book,
>electronic or otherwise.

	Clearly, you are NOW talking about a SMALL amount of informative text
or the -help option - this is a GOOD idea!  But why not have a SYNOPSIS section
in your manual...


NAME
     cc - C compiler

SYNOPSIS
     cc [ -a ] [ -align _block ] [ -Bbinding ] [ -c ] [ -C ]
          [ -dalign ] [ -dryrun ] [ -Dname [=def ] ] [ -E ]
          [ float_option ] [ -fsingle ] [ -g ] [ -go ] [ -help ]
          [ -Ipathname ] [ -J ] [ -Ldirectory ] [ -M ]
          [ -misalign ] [ -o outputfile ] [ -O[level] ]
          [ -p ] [ -P ] [ -pg ] [ -pic ] [ -PIC ] [ -pipe ]
          [ -Qoption prog opt ] [ -Qpath pathname ]
          [ -Qproduce sourcetype ] [ -R ] [ -S ] [ -sb ]
          [ -target target_arch ] [ -temp=directory ] [ -time ]
          [ -Uname ] [ -w ] sourcefile ...  [ -llibrary ]
 
This appears on the FIRST PAGE of the manual entry, so "man cc" and "cc -help"
take exactly the same amount of time to use, in fact, to be pedantic:

	1. "man cc" has less keystrokes than "cc -help"
	2. The "man" program loads quicker than "cc" - man is smaller!

And with man, if the SYNOPSIS doesn't tell you enough, then you can keep
browsing the entry, with -help, you have to go to man in the end!

Also, and this is my main gripe, too many programs have a -help option,
but no man entry:  the developer is just too lazy it seems.

Ciaos to you all!
Warwick.

Sorry to all who would rather this was mail rather than news.
--
  _--_|\   	warwick@cs.uq.oz.au
 /      *  <--	Computer Science Department,
 \_.--._/ 	University of Queensland,
       v    	AUSTRALIA.