(Sorry for not quoting names. It’s cumbersome to do with more than one
person in Gmail.)
> With the above rules this should be: flo [-cfrtw arg] [what[,from][-to]]
I think that’s too little information.
> It also just makes the usage easier to read, in my opinion. Dropping a
> few characters just isn't worth any loss in clarity.
Valid point. Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler. :)
From the information that I have now, then I would think that this
should be fine:
usage: program [-a] [-b] [-c] [-f file] [-n number] blah
usage: flo [-a] [-c id] [-f from] [-r id] [-t to] [-w what] [what[,from][-to]]
I’d like to write a KISS option parser that accepts “program -c -a -f
some_file”, but not “program -ca -fsome_file”. I prefer to keep the
rules simple.
Is it okay to use three dots in the usage text? (See echo’s man page.)
I think it means that you can repeat what’s before the three dots.
How do you feel about sorting the options? Should it always be done?
Received on Wed Aug 18 2010 - 17:55:10 CEST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Aug 18 2010 - 18:00:04 CEST