[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLI-117?page=comments#action_12418624 ]
Andrew Shirley commented on CLI-117: ------------------------------------ Issues 1 and 3 are related to a misunderstanding and the use-cases for Group needs to be clarified as I get the impression that it wasn't intended for repetition of a series of 'Option's but for imposing mutual exclusivity type constraints, for example allowing either "-url http://www.example.com"; or "-file /etc/foo" but not both. Or similarly forcing any 2 of 3 'Option's. There is certainly a use-case whereby we say the following set of 'Option's should repeat between 4 and 7 times and this should probably be a new Option implementation. the real issue is that we should code a new Option implementation to adress 1 and 3 and devise a new query mechanism to work better for deeper tree structures to address 2. > Improve the group option desing (ids, more than one instance, etc) > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CLI-117 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLI-117 > Project: Commons CLI > Type: Improvement > Versions: Nightly Builds > Reporter: David Leal > > I am ussing the group option and on my humble opionion it should be improved, > for example: > 1) API doesn't support for the moment a group of options like this: > - people > -id|size|age > but for more than one instance of the group, for example: > - people -id id1 -size 1 -age 10 -people -id id2 size 2 age 20 > so, the group option are the same for each people, but with id argument you > can identify each element of the group. > 2) There is no way to unique identify a option in a given group, for example: > Now the following syntax is not possible: > -id <name> > - people > -id|size|age > so, the general option name is id, and the group option is also id. When > using the CommandLine.hasOption("-id"), there is no way to distinguish if it > is a group option or just a general option. On my opinion, the group option > should be checked if there are present using the root group option as prefix, > for example something like this: CommandLine.hasOption("-people|-id"), so we > are clearly looking for the group option -id from people and with: > CommandLine.hasOption("-id") we look for general -id option. > 3) There is no clear the use of GroupBuilder.withMaximum() and > GroupBulder.withMinimum(), I expected to allow more than one group option on > the command line, like I have commented on 1), but it doesn't work and the > API doesn't allow to distinguish each group instances. > Thanks in advance, > David -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
