On Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:39 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > I don't think it would improve the module design, even without > considering cost of change. It just adds useless clutter.
Well, out of those who have responded in this thread, you're the only one who thinks that. Everyone else has been in favor of either making those config options passable to getopt or in favor of putting getopt on a struct which holds the those config options (with a free function which uses the init value of the struct for the common case). And yes, that's an argument by ad populum (or whatever the exact name is), but what's considered "clutter" is subjective. Yes, the improvement would be relatively minor, but so's the cost of the change, and while it doesn't necessarily show that you're wrong when no one seems to agree with you, it does at least say something when no one agrees with you. - Jonathan M Davis
