Documenting "--" (was Re: Glob problem)

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Redirected to zsh-workers.

On Oct 23,  2:47pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} Some of the regulars can tell me if the following looks right.

Apologies if the following is too nit-picky ...

} +Some shell builtin commands take options as given in invidiual entries.

Am I correct in understanding "given" here to mean "described"?  If so,
just say "described".

} +Some shell builtin commands also take options that begin with `tt(+)'
} +instead of `tt(-)'.  These commands are indicated in the list below.

The word "indicated" here makes me expect something similar to the <S>
and <Z> markings in the options list, which obviously isn't what you
mean.

} +Options must appear in a group before any non-option arguments;

"Options (and their individual arguments, if any) ..." ?  Also the whole
document could probably use a consistency check, because sometimes we
use the term "flags" to differentiate command options from setopts, and
other times we don't.  Maybe it would suffice to point out that "flags"
and "options" are the same thing and we use flags when there would be
confusion (such as when describing the "-o option" flag of "emulate").

Otherwise this all looks accurate.