On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 at 09:05PM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote: > Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather > than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are > two reasons:
A big +1 here. No need to reinvent the wheel; we are manually parsing command-line options, and should instead take advantage of the getopt or optparse modules. Your implementation plan sounds good, and should let us shake out bugs without making Sage unusable for anyone. > By the way, while investigating this, I came up with some questions: > > - What should "sage blah.spkg" do? It looks like it's supposed to > install the spkg, although this isn't documented anywhere that I can > see. Should we keep this behavior, or just make the user type "sage -i > blah.spkg"? Off the top of my head, I think "sage blah.spkg" should ask you if you want to install the spkg and just exit if you say no. > - "sage -log" seems to be broken: it tries to write to the > nonexistent file SAGE_ROOT/changelog.txt. Should we remove it or fix > it? (Again off the top of my head...) I say remove this. It's doesn't seem relevant to our current development procedures. > - what is "sage -darcs" supposed to do? I don't know what "darcs" is, > and I don't see any packages which seem relevant. > > - what about "sage -axiom"? What package installs axiom? Fricas? > > - does anyone use "sage -crap"? "sage -min"? "sage -inotebook"? > > - how about "sage -gthread" and friends? > > - how about "sage -valgrind" and friends, or "sage -t FILE -valgrind", > etc.? We should remove -darcs, since we don't use it anymore; I've never used any of the other options. Dan -- --- Dan Drake ----- http://mathsci.kaist.ac.kr/~drake -------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
