Joerg Schilling wrote:
Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No disrespect to Jörg, but FWIW I wholeheartedly concur. (I really don't
like the -longoptionname nomenclature, as used by find(1)).
This is really strange, so you like the hard to memorize options from cdrw?
I've only ever needed to use one option: -i to specify the image name.
Occasionally I use -l to list but that is usually for demo purposes
rather than actually using it.
Well, it does not support many of them.... tell me how you would design a
program that supports nearly 100 options without using long options.
Tell me how you would design a program like star that supports more than 170
options?
In my opinion the fact that you need to have so many options is the
problem, it doesn't matter if they are '-foo' '-f' '--foo' 'foo=' it is
the sheer number of them that makes the commands complex.
In some cases this is probably not easy to over come, find for example
just seems to need a lot of options because of what it does. A CD/DVD
writing program on the other hand probably doesn't need to be that
complex. Personally if I felt all these options really did need to be
set I'd have the command itself take a 'profile' - and maybe some higher
level things that use cdrecord(1) actually do that.
If you want specifics on cdrecord(1) the thing that annoys me most is
the mix of things with and without a leading '-'. For example why is it
'-pad' but padsize=# ? Why not -pad and -padsize ? I think after
looking at the manpage I might have worked it out but it wasn't obvious.
Some people care about the difference between --option and -option an
-o, personally I don't care as long as it is consistent withing the
suite of commands, and cdrecord(1) doesn't appear consistent to me
(maybe it is but it doesn't look like it from the usage message which is
82 lines long).
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
