[m-rev.] for review: record_all_arguments

[Zoltan Somogyi]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 23:37:04 +1100, Julien Fischer <jfischer at opturion.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 at 18:06, Zoltan Somogyi <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > For review by anyone. The diff does not include the automatically-updated
> > getopt.m.
> >
> > I would like feedback on
> >
> > - whether we should change the argument order of record_arguments
> >   to match the new record_all_arguments (I think we should, since it was
> >   added after the last release), and
> >
> 
> Yes.

Except that I was basing "it was added after the last release" on the mistaken
belief that the entry for that library module that I modified was from after
the last release. I now know that it was from *before* the last release.
Is your answer still yes?

> - whether we should use the new functionality to let mmc continue
> >   doing its job in the presence of bad options.
> >
> 
> What do you mean by "continue doing its job"?  Presumably, we still
> stop at some point and complain about the bad options?

I mean doing the same job as if the bad option was not there, *except*
for printing a diagnostic about that bad option.

> (Perhaps we should move the 22.01 news into the HISTORY file now, rather
> than waiting until just before the creation of the next release branch?)

It would definitely eliminate the chance of mistakes like this. I also do not see
what benefit we get from having the news for the last release in that file.

I think the main obstacle of moving that section to the HISTORY file is that
HISTORY contains plain text, and not markdown. I would guess that everyone
would agree with the propositions that

- there is no point in converting the existing contents of HISTORY to use markdown, and
- we do not want to mix plain text and markdown text in the same file.

I therefore propose that we move te 22.01.* news to a new HISTORY.md file,
with a note at the end saying that the history continues in the plain HISTORY file.
Or maybe we could name the two files HISTORY_SINCE_2022.md and
HISTORY_BEFORE_2022.

What do you guys think?

> That's fine otherwise.

Thank you.

Zoltan.