Re: Unknown command line options and --help

[Mariano Suarez-Alvarez <msuarezalvarez arnet com ar>]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Mike Newman wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-04-21 at 21:59, Mariano Suarez-Alvarez wrote:
>
> > The problem with that attitude towards the point is that even when the user
> > would be able to fix the errors, he can't because no one deemed it useful to
> > inform him what the error was to begin with. And even if the user can't fix
> > the error, he can ask some one who can, and this more enlightened person
> > will not be in a much better position do solve anything.
> >
> > Anyone who has had to deal with a Windows box not booting knows how not
> > being informed what the problem is feels like!
>
> 99% of the time I'd completely agree with you. But we're talking about
> command line options which the program doesn't understand, doesn't
> handle and should never have been passed, right?

Yup.

> Two choices - gracefully err on the side of caution, do what we can with
> what we have and launch the program, or fail with an impenetrable error.
> If you can honestly think of a good informative message to present to
> the user, with a means of fixing the problem at the touch of a button,
> I'm prepared to be convinced.

Error messages need not be impenetrable!

There is nothing hermetic in ls's response here:

    $ ls --not-an-option
    ls: unrecognized option `--not-an-option'
    Try `ls --help' for more information.

This message clearly states what the error is, and offers not a solution
(that's impossible in this case, in so far as ls can't read minds; I
don't know what the release schedule for fileutils is, but I'm pretty
sure no one is working on that. There is nothing more annoying than a
stupid program trying to out-smart the user) but points to further
sources of information (ls --help does not mention, though, further
documentation (texinfo, man pages...) and that could be very helpful for
the uninitiated)

If programmers start writing error messages like ``Error 1652417
at 0x19A02D38E7'' then we'll be in trouble, of course; but that's not
what happens usually: even the linux kernel has some very informative
messages :)

As to giving the user a means to fix the problem at the touch of a button,
that is not possible except for the most trivial of problems. Trying to
provide simple (from the user's view point) `solutions' to problems that
do not admit simple solutions is the best way to turn any system into
something unusable. It ends up making life more difficult even to the
kind of user those `solutions' are meant to help; word processors and
their insistence in making things one-click-away come to my mind as
examples.

Right now, when I log in into my gnome desktop, I get a little message
dialog saying that someone (I don't know who) can't open the audio
device. Solving that involves changing a few sensible things (like
/etc/devfsd.conf and friends) and I would not think for more than 10
seconds to rm -rf /opt/gnome if any component in gnome went out and
modified my system that deeply.

-- m

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mariano Suarez Alvarez
Departamento de Matematica - Universidad Nacional de Rosario
Pellegrini 250 - Rosario 2000 - Argentina

    De la observación de la irreductibilidad de las creencias últimas
    he sacado la mayor lección de mi vida. Aprendí a respetar las ideas
    ajenas, a detenerme ante el secreto de las conciencias, a entender
    antes de discutir, a discutir antes de condenar. Y como estoy en
    vena de confesiones, hago una más, quizás superflua: detesto con
    toda mi alma a los fanáticos.

    Norberto Bobbio, Italia civil.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------