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

[Pádraig Brady]

On 28/04/2022 07:18, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> 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.

From the netbsd man page it seems it behaves the same.

> > 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.

Fair point.

thanks,
Pádraig