Re: [PATCH 1/2] factor: add option for printing in x^y format

[Bernhard Voelker]

On 4/27/22 20:42, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 27/04/2022 19:36, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 27/04/2022 18:21, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>>> Finally, regarding '-e': is there any precedence (or a clashing option) in 
>>> any other
>>> factor(1) implementation?
>>
>> We generally avoid new short options where possible.
>> This would just need the long option to enable this
>> given it's kind of esoteric and not often used interactively.
> 
> I see NetBSD has used '-h' for this "human readable" functionality.
> I suppose for more compat with that we could have:
> 
>    -h, --exponents

Then we have to ensure that our -h works the same as theirs.

> We might leave the -h undocumented,
> for the reasons stated above.

I'm not a fan of such hidden features.  E.g. if another implementation
searches in our usage() if such an option already exists, then they'd be
fooled by the non-information.
Either we support a feature and it's cool, or we should leave it, i.e.,
in this case we could only have a long option, but if we have a short
option as well, then we also have to document it.

Have a nice day,
Berny