Re: argparse version 1.0.0
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 14:20:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: I invoke https://xkcd.com/927/ ! :) :-D I tried to improve one of the existing libs but it didn't go well enough. Glad you asked! I use an approach similar to the one here, with commands in a struct. The common arguments are parsed before invoking the command. https://github.com/CyberShadow/steamkeyactivator/blob/144d322ecee65f4f536e5fd4141837e51d61a27a/activator.d#L142 When only some commands need to share some arguments, you can put them in a tuple. https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger/blob/7c7dd167aea2214d594bab932ea4e41e5f0a357a/digger.d#L34 Now you have both approaches: parsing into struct with members and parsing into function arguments. Why do we need two if one is enough?
Re: argparse version 1.0.0
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 14:14:27 UTC, Andrey Zherikov wrote: On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 09:20:24 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Congratulations on the release. Though there's a good number of libraries for this task in D already, this solution looks very complete. I looked at them when I started this project and they didn't provide complete set of features I was looking for. That was the main reason to start this work. I invoke https://xkcd.com/927/ ! :) I was wondering if you ran into any strong reasons for describing the arguments as a struct, rather than, well, function arguments. I have had good success so far with the latter, which has the benefit of being succinct: https://github.com/CyberShadow/btdu/blob/116d190079ca77d61383eb738defa4318d5a1e5f/source/btdu/main.d#L59 This is an interesting approach. I think they are equivalent for simple cases but how would you model subcommands with common arguments for all of them? Glad you asked! I use an approach similar to the one here, with commands in a struct. The common arguments are parsed before invoking the command. https://github.com/CyberShadow/steamkeyactivator/blob/144d322ecee65f4f536e5fd4141837e51d61a27a/activator.d#L142 When only some commands need to share some arguments, you can put them in a tuple. https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger/blob/7c7dd167aea2214d594bab932ea4e41e5f0a357a/digger.d#L34
Re: argparse version 1.0.0
On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 09:20:24 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Congratulations on the release. Though there's a good number of libraries for this task in D already, this solution looks very complete. I looked at them when I started this project and they didn't provide complete set of features I was looking for. That was the main reason to start this work. I was wondering if you ran into any strong reasons for describing the arguments as a struct, rather than, well, function arguments. I have had good success so far with the latter, which has the benefit of being succinct: https://github.com/CyberShadow/btdu/blob/116d190079ca77d61383eb738defa4318d5a1e5f/source/btdu/main.d#L59 This is an interesting approach. I think they are equivalent for simple cases but how would you model subcommands with common arguments for all of them?
Re: argparse version 1.0.0
On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 19:08:16 UTC, Andrey Zherikov wrote: Hi everyone, I'm glad to announce first major version of [argparse](https://code.dlang.org/packages/argparse) - a library for creating command line interface. It took some time to figure out public API of this library and I believe it's mature enough for the major version. Congratulations on the release. Though there's a good number of libraries for this task in D already, this solution looks very complete. I was wondering if you ran into any strong reasons for describing the arguments as a struct, rather than, well, function arguments. I have had good success so far with the latter, which has the benefit of being succinct: https://github.com/CyberShadow/btdu/blob/116d190079ca77d61383eb738defa4318d5a1e5f/source/btdu/main.d#L59
