On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]>
wrote:

> EstebanLM wrote
> > is cool.
> > I would like to explore the possibility to replace our command line
> parser
> > with getopt. You know… is more compatible at the end :)
>
> I find the implementation of our command line handlers very confusing. It
> seems like it grew organically from a smaller idea and the design got out
> of
> control. There are many assumptions that can make it hard to extend,
> especially to combine multiple options, as Ben and I discovered when
> implementing the "don't run startup scripts" handler. It would be nice to
> revisit starting from a behavioral specification.
>

Well, what makes you say that?
The core CommandLineHandler itself is pretty generic and can do a lot of
things.

Then, yeah, what is under is quite varied. But that's to be expected when
trying out "new tech".

I've been making one of my own here for a given project with about 20-30
commands and I had to put in some structure indeed.

Phil

>
>
>
> -----
> Cheers,
> Sean
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://forum.world.st/GetOpt-tp4793474p4793621.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
>
>

Reply via email to