On Sun, 19 Oct, to...@acm.org wrote:
> On second thought, regarding these arguments (from Stephan Beal) : > > > @ is conventionally used by some apps to mean "include list from > > this file > > this is exactly what we need. Include the (timeline) list from this > file (implying about this file) Sorry, there is a misunderstanding here. What Stephan was saying is that the *contents* of the file preceded with the @ is read in (as a matter of fact, the name of the file behind the @ does not matter at all). Your scenario is the opposite way: The name of the file is the relevant part and not its content. Just google for https://www.google.com/search?q=compiler+response+file and you'll see that it's common in the Microsoft world as well as in the GNU world. It would be counter-intuitive to use a well-established convention for something else. In fact, I'd like to see fossil support @ (the proper way) as well. However for historical reasons, fossil seems to use --args for that: Commands and filenames may be passed on to fossil from a file by using: fossil --args FILENAME ... But *this* functionality is usually implemented by the @ prefix, so it might rather be fossil @FILENAME ... Greetings, Stefan -- Stefan Bellon _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
