On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:25 PM, John H Palmieri <jhpalmier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 11:13 am, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu> > wrote: >> On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: >> >> >> On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, 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: >> >> >> +1! >> >> >> When this issue came up a year or two ago, there seemed to be a >> >> surprising amount of opposition to typing the extra dash, so the >> >> interest in changing the options and parsing waned. I would be >> >> very happy to see us switch to standard GNU option parsing. >> >> > +1. In fact, I tried to do this years ago, but my patch broke all >> > over the place and was bit-bucketed quickly :( >> >> For >> reference,http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/3403d3... >> >> In any case, I would now be in favor of such a move. As for making the >> transition, I'm not a huge fan of trying to control it via environment >> variables (at least, once it's beyond the extremely experimental >> stage). Once we have the back end, lets start using it by making a >> substitution for a fixed list of command, e.g. '-notebook' -> '-- >> notebook' before invoking . Down the road we can add deprecation >> warnings whenever such a substitution is made, and eventually get rid >> of this step altogether. >> >> Perhaps keeping the old code around and usable in some form would be >> worth it for a while, because bugs here could be rather debilitating. > > My patch basically just creates a new file, sage-sage.py, and > SAGE_ROOT/sage calls it (right now depending on the value of an > environment variable) instead of sage-sage. So the original parser > sage-sage is still there. I've slightly modified it, adding "--merge" > to the existing option "-merge", for instance, but it's essentially > intact.
Nice. So basically it calls sage-sage, and if that doesn't parse any options, it then calls sage-sage.py? In that case, "sage -gp" won't be any slower at all. I think this is a great architecture, and we can get rid of most of sage-sage, but leave a little for speed purposes. William -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
