I think this bug can be closed.
Here's my reasoning. For me, a major point with the auto-generated usage text
is that it helps the developer of the program see the importance of picking
good variable names. If a dev chooses to name them $integer1 and $integer2
(which are obviously horrible variable names because they tell nothing about
what they will be used for), then the generated usage text *should* looks
stupid. Garbage in, garbage out.
In the same way, if the name of the variable doesn't give an indication of the
type (e.g. $age is a number), then the error is still with the developer and
not the language.
This is a non-issue, and the ticket should be closed. :)
- Salve (who is looking through all tickets related to MAIN)
Wed, 27 May 2015 06:11:13 -0700 skrev b...@post.pl:
> > In the original report, an argument can be made that the programmer
> > ought to have made the program more useful by writing
> >
> > sub MAIN (Int $integer) { ... }
>
> What if there are two integer params? MAIN (Int $integer1, Int
> $integer2) looks bad and subroutine body may be hard to understand.
> We already have typed variable and choosing variable name to duplicate
> type name just to display this information to caller is redundant.
>
> Despite that I found another inconsistency in positional params -
> anonymous one still display types:
>
> $ perl6 -e 'sub MAIN (Int, Str) { ... }'
> Usage:
> -e '...' <Int> <Str>
>
>
> Maybe more consistent way of displaying types would be "--age=<Int>
> --name=<Str>" for named and "<Int>age <Str>name" for named positionals
> and "<Int> <Str>" for anonymous positionals?
>
>
>
>
> > On 26 May 2015, at 20:01, Patrick R. Michaud via RT <perl6-bugs-
> > follo...@perl.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue May 26 08:38:30 2015, b...@post.pl wrote:
> >> I think this is bug because type is more important than irrelevant
> >> variable name.
> >> Expected output is: "Usage: /tmp/tmpfile <Int>"
> >
> > In this case, the variable name is "irrelevant" primarily because the
> > programmer chose an irrelevant name. A clearer case for the current
> > behavior comes from
> >
> > sub MAIN (Int $count!) { ... }
> >
> > which produces a more useful "Usage: /tmp/tmpfile <count>"
> > message.
> >
> > Or consider a grep-like replacement:
> >
> > sub MAIN ($pattern!, @*files) { ... }
> >
> > that produces "Usage: /tmp/tmpfile <pattern> [<files> ...]".
> >
> >
> > In the original report, an argument can be made that the programmer
> > ought to have made the program more useful by writing
> >
> > sub MAIN (Int $integer) { ... }
> >
> > which outputs "Usage: /tmp/SJk_VxNAxM <integer>".
> >
> > I'm inclined to reject this ticket, but will leave it open for
> > further discussion.
> >
> > Pm
> >
> >
> >
> >
