[Info-vax] Can DCL be enhanced to report why a qualifier is ambiguous ?

[Tad Winters]

On 5/28/2021 5:33 PM, Dave Froble via Info-vax wrote:
> On 5/28/2021 2:57 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2021-05-28, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2021 9:57 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 5/27/2021 2:57 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>> I've mentioned this before, but it would be really nice if DCL could
>>>>> be enhanced to list all the possible candidates in the error message
>>>>> if you enter an ambiguous keyword.
>>>
>>> Ya know, perhaps it already does?
>>>
>>> Type HELP L to see what happens ...
>>>
>>
>> And if you have installed a custom command which isn't in the help ?
>>
>> As mentioned in the title, but not in the body, I'm also talking
>> about qualifiers as well.
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>
> Either know what you want to do, and do it right, or, don't do it at all.
>
> For someone as security conscious as you claim to be, you come up with
> some questionable ideas.
>

It's always been my practice to use full command names and full
qualifier names in command procedures.  I would even specifically add
default qualifiers, if I found that users would tend to create symbols
to change the default for themselves.  Of course the command procedure
would take more space, but it was far less likely to have to modified in
the future, unless some command was removed from the command tables.

As far as interactive use, sure shortened commands would be what I'd
type.  If I made an error, that encouraged me to improve my keyboard
skills.  If a new, conflicting command had been added, all the more
reason for me to adjust what I type.