On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:10:24 -0500 Dan McGee <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Allan McRae <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dieter Plaetinck wrote: > >> My 2 cents: portability is important, and code conciseness is more > >> important then having a fancy interface with many possibilities. > >> Isn't it just redundant/bloat to support both long and short ones? > >> > > > > No.... there are only so many letters of the alphabet and we still > > have many long options without letters assigned to them that have > > no obvious shortening. > > No, if anything I'd drop short options and keep long, but there would > be a lot of pushback. > > Does it matter if it works, and several people here can understand it > well enough? Most people didn't even know we did this until today and > we surely didn't hear objections when it went in, so it clearly isn't > that bad... > > -Dan > Hmm this was about makepkg right? makepkg --help | grep '-' | wc -l 24 lowercase + uppercase gives you 52 options. Dieter
