On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 07:53:25 -0400, Regan Heath <re...@netmail.co.nz>
wrote:
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 20:39:42 +0100, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
On 10/4/11 12:46 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-10-04 17:48, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 10/04/11 09:09, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-10-04 13:21, Regan Heath wrote:
In this particular case, because these std,.getopt options are
global
variables, building something which uses them, or std.getopt will
introduce side effects to other uses of std.getopt. Meaning the
current
design makes it impossible to build upon in an orthogonal manner.
This
is the 'problem' people have with it.
Exactly, yet another reason why std.getopt is badly designed.
Wait, I thought that was the one! Now I wonder what the others were.
Andrei
Ok, sorry. I meant something like: yet another reason why global values
are bad. And another thing that will hard(er) to do with the current
design of std.getopt.
Did it ever prevent you from getting anything done with it?
That's not the question we should be asking. The question we should be
asking is, will anyone ever want to re-use getopts parser for something
other than a once off command line parse for a command line
application. The answer is, maybe. And given that, isn't it better if
they can re-use it without running any risk of side-effects etc.
busybox.
(not that I have an opinion here, I've never used getopt before)
-Steve
