svn commit: r362017 - in head/usr.bin/sed: . tests

[Steffen Nurpmeso]

Hey.

Ian Lepore wrote in
<de4e33af55f1fba6672b0c3f866e33853849eb0e.camel at freebsd.org>:
 |On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 16:29 +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
 |> Hello.
 |> 
 |> Mateusz Piotrowski wrote in
 |> <995726df-cb28-c294-09ca-6cca302b24a6 at FreeBSD.org>:
 |>|On 6/11/20 12:06 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
 |>|> Yuri Pankov wrote in
 |>|> <a5e45631-bf32-56bc-4c03-0d0ad1d10ff2 at yuripv.dev>:
 |>|>|Mateusz Piotrowski wrote:
 |>|>|> Author: 0mp (doc,ports committer)
 |>|>|> Date: Wed Jun 10 19:23:58 2020
 |>|>|> New Revision: 362017
 |>|>|> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/362017
 |>|>|> 
 |>|>|> Log:
 |>|>|>    Read commands from stdin when -f - is passed to sed(1)
 |>|>  ..
 |>|>|Am I reading it wrong, or is it the same test case added 3 times?
 |>|>
 |>|> It also used "Fl f Cm -" instead of "Fl f Ar -".  Just saying..
 |> 
 |>|Which is correct. "-" is not a variable here. It is a fixed string hence
 |>|the use of Cm.
 |> 
 |> I would rather say no, .Ar is an argument (to the ".Fl"ag f),
 |> whereas .Cm is a command modifier:
 |> 
 |>    Command Modifiers
 |>      The command modifier is identical to the '.Fl' (flag) command \
 |>      with the
 |>      exception that the '.Cm' macro does not assert a dash in front \
 |>      of every
 |>      argument.  Traditionally flags are marked by the preceding dash, \
 |>      however,
 |>      some commands or subsets of commands do not use them.  Command \
 |>      modifiers
 |>      may also be specified in conjunction with interactive commands \
 |>      such as
 |>      editor commands.
 |> 
 |
 |Yeah, but...
 |
 |   The '.Fl' macro without any arguments results in a dash representing
 |   stdin/stdout. Note that giving '.Fl' a single dash will result in
 |   two dashes. The '.Fl' macro is parsed and is callable.
 |
 |And that seems to argue that "Fl f Fl" is correct.

This will not result in a well-formed XML document.

I seem to have lost track now.  He wanted to document the typical
"is standard input" argument to the command line option (flag) -f,
didn't he?  If so then "Fl f Ar -" should be the correct way of
documenting this.

Of course - "modifies the command" ("is a command modifier"), heh.
You could also say "Fl f Pa -" if you go that route, because the
argument should be a path, yet it is not in this very special
case, which denotes standard input.  But i would use "Fl f Ar -".

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)