Re: [PATCH 10/11] quote consistently and make tests pass with new quoting from gnulib

[Akim Demaille]

Le 8 févr. 2012 à 17:32, Paul Eggert a écrit :

> On 02/08/2012 02:54 AM, Akim Demaille wrote:
>> -        error (0, 0, _("missing operand after '%s'"), argv[argc - 1]);
>> +        error (0, 0, _("%s: missing operand"), quotearg_colon (argv[argc - 
>> 1]));
>>       else
>> -        error (0, 0, _("extra operand '%s'"), argv[optind + 1]);
>> +        error (0, 0, _("extra operand %s"), quote (argv[optind + 1]));
> 
> This doesn't seem consistent: shouldn't both use quotearg_colon,
> or neither?

Hi Paul,

thanks for the review.  Actually, I am bugged by this
one: I can read easily

        --output: missing operand

but I don't read as easily

        output: extra operand

I would go for

        extra operand: output

for instance.  Is this what you mean?

> Otherwise I didn't see a problem, in a quick perusal.

Thanks!