Em Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 12:58:35PM -0700, David Ahern escreveu: > On 12/2/13, 12:38 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >Can you suggest a better name for the option being discussed?
> >Perhaps one of: > >--show-event-time > >--event-time > >? > > Why not just --event-time? > Really should have dropped the 'show' from the recent perf-script > change (just --task-events and --mmap-events). Probably, yeah, Ingo made some point about using --show- for some reason, Ingo? One I can think of is that, in general, plain --feature can mean, at least, one of --enable-feature and --show-feature, so perhaps that is the point. But then, perhaps that may be implied by the context, i.e. when recording, --feature means enable it, while when reporting, what we're doing is basically _showing_ things, so --feature means just that. - Arnaldo > > > >As a policy I think we should go on adding just long options and only > >after there is a really strong case we should use a short option for > >really, really popular options. > > And adding options to .perfconfig. Need to use that more. > > David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
