12/20/22 19:26, Todd C. Miller пишет: > On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 09:36:39 +0000, Klemens Nanni wrote: > >> Both styles are used, but I argue that the former fails to distinguish >> between >> $ program 'args in one shell word' >> and >> $ program one arg per shell word >> >> It's a minor thing, imho, but perhaps we can decide for one and stick to >> it throughout the tree? >> >> Triple dots also make it immediately clear that many arguments may >> follow, no matter what the "arg"ument is named. > > I agree, and as jmc@ points out, .Ar will emit "file ..." when used > without an explicit argument.
Good point. Let me come up with a list of manuals that could be changed, then we'll have some numbers. > >> Here's one examplatory diff for timeout(1). >> >> Feedback? >> >> Index: timeout.1 >> =================================================================== >> RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/timeout/timeout.1,v >> retrieving revision 1.3 >> diff -u -p -r1.3 timeout.1 >> --- timeout.1 4 Sep 2021 11:58:31 -0000 1.3 >> +++ timeout.1 29 Oct 2022 20:53:05 -0000 >> @@ -41,14 +41,14 @@ >> .Op Fl -preserve-status >> .Ar duration >> .Ar command >> -.Op Ar args >> +.Op Ar arg ... >> .Sh DESCRIPTION >> The >> .Nm >> utility executes >> .Ar command , >> with any >> -.Ar args , >> +.Ar arg ... , > > The change to the DESCRIPTION seems a little awkward to me. I > understand you want to match the SYNOPSIS but in this case it comes > at the expense of readability. Personally, I'd prefer: > > .Ar arg Ns s , Neat, I like that much better. > >> and kills it if it is still running after the >> specified >> .Ar duration . > > - todd
