On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 05:00:55PM -0700, Micah Cowan wrote:
> I might write one
> for you for kicks if I have the time ;).
>
> Micah
BTW, Mark,
What exactly was it that was inflexible about your curent getopt
implementation? Because as I was implementing it, I realized I was
purposefully avoiding various extensions, that might include ones you
needed.
The reason I was avoiding them is because some of them rely on very
poor programming assumptions, and others directly break POSIX
behavior. For example, GNU's getopt() will switch around the elements
of the argv array, despite the fact that the argument is declared as
char * const argv[]. I refuse to do that, although I will do it if
the const is removed from the declaration. I'll assume that's the
feature you wanted, anyway, since it *is* handy to stick your options
any ol' place. I doubt the declaration change will break your code,
anywhoo.
Micah
