GNU bug report logs - #52999
29.0.50; [PATCH] `eshell-eval-using-options' should follow POSIX/GNU argument conventions

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 01:37:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Found in version 29.0.50

Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #20 received at 52999 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 52999 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#52999: 29.0.50; [PATCH v3] `eshell-eval-using-options' should
 follow POSIX/GNU argument conventions
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 16:48:39 -0800
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 1/5/2022 6:50 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc: 52999 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:09:29 -0800
>>
>> +@item symbol
>> +This element is the name of the Lisp symbol that will be bound to
>> +@var{value}.
> 
> Is it a symbol or its name (a string)?  You say "name", but the
> example:
> 
>>                If @var{symbol} is @code{nil}, specifying this switch
> 
> uses a symbol, not its name.

Good catch. I've fixed this to say that it's the Lisp symbol.

>> +@item :preserve-args
>> +If present, do not pass @var{macro-args} through @code{flatten-tree}
>> +and @code{eshell-stringify-list}.
> 
> I think this should explain the effect of that, or the difference
> between using and not using this keyword.

I had to do a bit of digging to figure out what this keyword is supposed 
to do in practice. It seems that it's used when a built-in Eshell 
command wants to be able to accept arbitrary Lisp objects as arguments, 
instead of working with just a flat list of strings. I've added more 
detail to this paragraph.

>> +---
>> +** 'eshell-eval-using-options' now follows POSIX/GNU argument syntax conventions.
>> +This now accepts command-line options with values passed as a single
>     ^^^^
> "Eshell" instead of "This" will make it more clear what you mean.

Ok, I updated this to refer to "Built-in commands in Eshell".

Thanks for looking over the patch.
[0001-Follow-POSIX-GNU-argument-conventions-for-eshell-eva.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

This bug report was last modified 3 years and 129 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.