Craig Dunigan wrote: > I still maintain, though, that it would be a bit friendlier to report > something about what was wrong with the syntax. Seeing nothing more > than "Usage" over and over is frustrating. In my case, I kept reusing a > mistyped option that didn't actually exist. I was recalling the command > from history first, and reviewing only the parts I thought were wrong > each time. I'd have reviewed the whole command if it had told me "no > such option: '-a'," or even just "bad option," although actually telling > me which option was bad is preferable. But I suppose that suggestion > could also just be defensiveness after making an ass of myself. :)
The command line parser we use doesn't tell us, when it detects an error, what command line argument caused the error. I guess we could do the old hack of reporting the last successfully parsed command line argument before the failure. But my main comment is: This is open source! Feel free to write a patch to make it better. Think of this as your opportunity for fame and glory in mozilla land. :) But seriously, we invite patches the help make NSS better. Please consider yourself invited to contribute. /Nelson _______________________________________________ dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
