Format "wcurl --help" output for 80 columns with correct indentation#87
Format "wcurl --help" output for 80 columns with correct indentation#87
Conversation
|
Now: 
Before: 
I've spotted some small differences between Text changes are:
I am happy to iterate on that (for formatting changes, or the text changes that I did). As a personal comment also: my terminal has 94 columns by default (no particular reason). I chose 80 here as an old standard but happy to choose 88 like black (or 90) instead of the current 130. I checked |
cpina
force-pushed
the
format-help-80-columns
branch
from
7a36a40 to
4dd1170
Compare
|
I'll fix the remaining test ASAP (maybe Friday or Saturday morning). |
cpina
force-pushed
the
format-help-80-columns
branch
from
33a3af9 to
667c963
Compare
| { | ||
| cat << _EOF_ | ||
| ${PROGRAM_NAME} -- a simple wrapper around curl to easily download files. | ||
| Usage: wcurl [options...] <URL> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the idea behind this change?
I prefer the current format where it lists a few different ways of invoking wcurl while exposing which options can be used.
I know curl uses this format, but that makes more sense given the amount of option it has.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My reasoning when I did it:
- it was naturally longer than 80 columns so I wanted to keep it shorter / remove it
- at that time, I thought that the text would belong to
man wcurl(SYNPOSIS section) instead ofcurl --helpoutput (comparing withcurl --help,ls --help, etc. it seemed a bit surprising to have it there) - I thought that it was a repetition of the detailed options that were below
But, I see that adds some overview on how to use it.
What do you think if I try to re-introduce it with multiple line formatting, so the user would see something like:
${PROGRAM_NAME} [--curl-options <CURL_OPTIONS>]... [--no-decode-filename] \
[-o|-O|--output <PATH>] [--dry-run] [--] <URL>...
${PROGRAM_NAME} [--curl-options=<CURL_OPTIONS>]... [--no-decode-filename] \
[--output=<PATH>] [--dry-run] [--] <URL>...
${PROGRAM_NAME} -h|--help
${PROGRAM_NAME} -V|--version
Would it be confusing?
(I would also add -o|-O before the second --output=<PATH> as well, unless there is some reason that is not there)
Thank you!
2 participants
No description provided.