On Apr 2, 2005 8:02 PM, Nick Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think these are explanatory. > > If we can't think of a suitable name why should we add one?
Well obviously if we can't think of a good name, we shouldn't add a bad one :-), but long option names, if well-chosen, are often _much_ easier to remember if you only use the option very occasionally... So it's worth at least a bit of effort to come up with one. I think it needn't be _completely_ self-explanatory, as long as it's easy to remember, and "makes sense" after reading the options documentation or --help output. Something like `--vanilla' is probably not going to indicate to a completely naive user what's going on, but it's almost certainly meaningful enough[*] to jog the memory of someone who has read the documentation in the past (whereas -Q is more iffy). How about `--default-settings' (which could be abbreviated `--default'; perhaps it ought to also accept the plural of that, `--defaults', without actually putting it in the option help)? [*] For a native english speaker -- this is the big problem with `--vanilla' I think. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel