Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I like the idea of simplifying things. I suggest just doing one tool
> > at first and seeing how the feedback goes.
>
> And what's wrong with using argp? It's there, it's tested and used.
One objection might be the lack of a standard standalone ve
On Sun, 2002-07-14 at 21:44, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I like the idea of simplifying things. I suggest just doing one tool
> at first and seeing how the feedback goes.
And what's wrong with using argp? It's there, it's tested and used.
--
---. ,-. 1325 Ches
When adding new options to gnu utilities, I am always annoyed that I
have to add each option in four places :
long-options
short-options
usage()
whatever.texi
The solution I've come up with is to replace the glocal "stuct
option" definition in the main program source with
typedef struct linef
> From: Andrew D Jewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 19:38:34 -0400
>
> Is this something of interest to the community as a whole?
> Should I work on changing some standard tools and submitting patches,
> or should I shut the hell up?
I like the idea of simplifying things. I su
