Re: diff cmd syntax question for Old Hundred Eyes

On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 02:47:35PM -0800, Colin Putney wrote:

> >This would imply:
> >
> > 1. Dates must contain some non-numeric character. A date of
> > 20020128 is both a valid date and a valid revision number, so
> > we'll interpret it as a revision, and insist on 2002-01-28 or
> > something similar for dates. Good error reporting should make
> > this easy for users to figure out.
> >
> > 2. Both -r and -R shouldn't use colons to separate range delimiters
> > anymore, because dates can contain colons. Instead, we just
> > pass the flag twice. I believe apr_getopt() preserves the order
> > of options, and allows duplicate options, precisely for
> > situations like this.
>
> I think this is a step backwards. The current notation (-r N:M) is much
> better than the CVS way (-r N -r M). It makes it clear that the two
> revisions are bound together semantically. You're asking for the changes
> made in a range of revisions from N to M, and this is reflected in the
> syntax: you can only pass 1 -r option, which can have only two
> revisions. Using multiple options suggests that I could do a command
> like this:

[ snip much stuff ]

i have to say i agree with colin here. i MUCH prefer specifying revs
as foo:bar, rather than -r foo -r bar. having to specify it with
separate args is just clunky.

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                     Unix was not designed to stop you from 
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net       doing stupid things, because that would  
http://electricjellyfish.net/      stop you from doing clever things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org