"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.23.1317827712.28623.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 16:24:32 Jens Mueller wrote: >> > However, the current way to parametrise getopt is to change the >> > character for options ('-'), and I belive the string for long option is >> > twice the character for short option ("--"). I don't think this makes >> > great sense. We could parametrize a long option string (that we could >> > set to "-"), and a short option char (that may or may not be >> > automatically set to longOptionString[0]). But no parametrization on >> > the >> > shortOptionChar and on the longOptionString is fine too. Nobody would >> > complain the call to getopt could be screwed up by another programmer >> > modifiying the shortOptionChar behind your back if this could not be >> > changed in the first place... >> >> This can be implemented. But right now I'm trying to figure out whether >> it's worth it.
FWIW, that would make it possible to parse the command line of programs like *ahem* DMD itself. > > Personally, I think that the usage of a single dash with long options is > the > sort of thing that should be discouraged in programs, since it goes > against > how posix programs normally work. > Not all programs are Posix programs, though (for better or worse). Though I don't have any real data to back this up, single dash long options seem to be common on Windows. And I don't think I've ever seen combined short options on Windows software that wasn't a GNU port. Again, FWIW.
