Re: Changing our help messages to mention --foo options instead of -foo options

2014-10-26 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: >> >> Some of our options are handled elsewhere, via ad hoc >> code that is generally less flexible. > > Can you point me to this? Pretty much any code handling command lines should > either be use the nsAppRunner code or using the nsIComma

Re: Changing our help messages to mention --foo options instead of -foo options

2014-10-24 Thread Benjamin Smedberg
On 10/23/14 9:20 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hello. Our command-line option handling is *interesting*. Did you know that: - our options work in -foo form and --foo form; - they are case-insensitive; - this holds for both short options (e.g. -h) and long options (e.g. -help). I did in fact

Re: Changing our help messages to mention --foo options instead of -foo options

2014-10-23 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > > So, for example, the following are all equivalent: -h, -H, --h, --H. On Windows, /h and /H are also equivalent. > As are -help, --help, -HELP, --HeLp. Again on Windows, /help, /HELP, /HelP, etc. are equivalent. As are /-help, /-H

Changing our help messages to mention --foo options instead of -foo options

2014-10-23 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
Hello. Our command-line option handling is *interesting*. Did you know that: - our options work in -foo form and --foo form; - they are case-insensitive; - this holds for both short options (e.g. -h) and long options (e.g. -help). So, for example, the following are all equivalent: -h, -H, --h,