Andreas Schwab <sch...@linux-m68k.org> writes:
> On Feb 14 2025, Dale R. Worley wrote:
>
>> And really, that means that the effect of -r is kind of complicated and
>> unintuitive.
>
> Not really. The command uses either the supplied filename or $HISTFILE
> to name the file to operate on. Other than that, the filename argument
> has no effect.
Of course, intuitive is in the mind of the reader. But from my point of
view, I look at "history -r foo" and see "read the contents of foo and
put it in the history list". What it is really doing is "declare foo to
be the history file, and then read its contents and put them in the
history list". The problem as I see it is that the easiest to spot part
of the documentation is
-r Read the contents of the history file and append them to
the current history list.
which states the (secondary) reading but doesn't mention the (primary)
setting of what the history file *is*.
What I'd prefer is something like
-r Set filename (or $HISTFILE) to be the history file.
Read the contents of the history file and append them to
the current history list.
That emphasizes the primary effect of the command.
Dale
