Timeline for Convention/standard on using curly braces around options
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 19, 2022 at 23:17 | history | edited | thanasisp | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
format
|
| Mar 19, 2018 at 21:02 | answer | added | TSG | timeline score: 9 | |
| Jan 20, 2018 at 13:01 | history | edited | Jeff Schaller♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected typo, even though it's present in the original; other grammatical tweaks
|
| Sep 7, 2016 at 16:42 | answer | added | Darren Gansberg | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 4, 2015 at 8:58 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackUnix/status/573044819603410944 | ||
| Mar 3, 2015 at 20:41 | comment | added | umbasa | I always thought that command line syntax came out of ENBF, but {} in ENBF means exactly the opposite (repetition of argument instead of one possible choice like in tar situation). I tried to google {} syntax with aim to windows and it seems like {} is very common on windows, it even has a description on technet. Sigh, Maybe I'm trying too hard to find the truth. | |
| Mar 3, 2015 at 20:29 | comment | added | umbasa | upstream for arch man-pages is man7.org, tar page is exactly the same man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/tar.1.html. | |
| Mar 3, 2015 at 17:13 | comment | added | muru |
Usually I'd think <> as being compulsory, but I suppose that's reserved for arguments as opposed to options. Counter: Ubuntu's version of the GNU tar manpage (manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/trusty/en/man1/tar.1.html, for one) doesn't use this form, neither does linux.die.net/man/1/tar or Debian. I think you might be looking at BSD tar's manpage, so if a convention exists, it might be a BSD thing.
|
|
| Mar 3, 2015 at 17:04 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 3, 2015 at 18:08 | |||||
| Mar 3, 2015 at 17:01 | history | asked | umbasa | CC BY-SA 3.0 |