order of options to ngram-count

[Alexy Khrabrov]

Ilya, thanks!  Umm, I've typed these lines anew from what I've run  
before -- and there was a real -order 1 there.  In any case, my  
control run shows OK now.

I understand there's a tradition, so in case more GNU compliance is  
desired, options with long names may start with -- as an option.  :)

Cheers,
Alexy

On Nov 2, 2007, at 3:22 PM, ilya oparin wrote:

>
> It looks like in your first "run forever" line you
> forgot to put "-" right before "order" option, so
> ngram-count just skips this invalid option and build
> default trigrams instead of unigrams. In case you have
> large data, that would take long.