> On Oct 12 15:00:23, [email protected] wrote: > > Jan Stary <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > Some programs in bin/ and usr.bin/ use the following idiom > > > to make sure that there are no options present: > > > > > > while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, "")) != -1) > > > switch (ch) { > > > case '?': > > > default: > > > usage(); > > > /* NOTREACHED */ > > > } > > > > > > if (argc != optind) { > > > usage(); > > > /* NOTREACHED */ > > > } > > > > > > Why is this better then simply checking that (argc == 1)? > > > > getopt(3) handles --. Using getopt(3) everywhere is good for > > consistency. > > I don't get it: why do we need to handle -- > in utils which take no options and no arguments? > > e.g. logname(1) is supposed to be launched just like "logname". > Does logname.c do the above just to handle "logname --" ?
Because POSIX says so. Look Jan, if you are going to start touching POSIX utilities you need to read the standards.
