On 01/30/2012 05:33 PM, Jérémy Compostella wrote: > Pádraig, Jim, others, > > - Solution 1: > Pádraig wrotes: >> I wonder might we have a separate option, --suffix-start, and >> theoretically that could accept alphabetic options too? I'm not >> suggesting we do this, but it's worth discussion. > That's was my first idea but since your first mail subject was "split > --numeric-suffixes=N" I assumed that you already thought about it as a > bad solution. Wrong assumption I guess. > > - Solution 2: > Pádraig wrotes: >> Thinking a bit more about it, it's probably worth to split the short >> and long options. Have -d not take a param as before, and have >> --numeric-suffixes take an optional param. >> To do this, leave 'optional_argument' in the long_opts array, and just >> remove the :: from the getopts call.
My vote is for solution 2. Less options = simpler interface for users. I don't think it's too onerous to mandate, numeric suffixes for this feature. > Personally, I do prefer the "Solution 1" since the result looks more > consistent, more powerful andf does not change anything to the current > options. > > However, it needs more work. cheers, Pádraig.
