Re: Expected behavior for -cs and -ncs

John E Hein wrote:
> david ingamells wrote at 19:42 +0200 on Jul 23, 2008:
>  > This works in 2.2.10:
>  > 
>  > $ indent -npro -ncs
>  > 
>  > unsigned char *cp = (unsigned char *)ptr;
>  > int
>  > foo ()
>  > {
>  >   return (int)n;
>  > }
>  > 
>  > $ indent -npro -cs
>  > 
>  > unsigned char *cp = (unsigned char *) ptr;
>  > int
>  > foo ()
>  > {
>  >   return (int) n;
>  > }
>  > 
>  > 
>  > I know of no update that fixed this in 2.2.10, so I am surprised that it 
>  > doesn't work in 2.2.9.
>  > I have added this to the regression test now, so it will be checked in 
>  > the future.
>
> Seems okay in my local test here on 2.2.9, too...
>
>
> echo '(unsigned char *)ptr;' | gindent -npro -cs
> (unsigned char *) ptr;
>
> echo '(unsigned char *)ptr;' | gindent -npro -ncs
> (unsigned char *)ptr;
>
> However, --no-space-after-cast fails:
>
>
> echo '(unsigned char *)ptr;' | gindent -npro --space-after-cast
> (unsigned char *) ptr;
>
> echo '(unsigned char *)ptr;' | gindent -npro --no-space-after-cast
> indent: unknown option "no-space-after-cast"
>
>
>   
A quick check in the code explains why:

{"no-space-after-casts",                        "ncs"},

And the manual says the same. I think what is best is that I update the 
manual to remove the trailing "s" and recognise both forms in the code.
That way users will move over to the right one and existing users won't 
get a nasty surprise.