Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Anthony Carrico
(24 Sep 2002 15:23 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Robert Bruce Findler
(24 Sep 2002 15:37 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Anthony Carrico
(24 Sep 2002 16:46 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Robert Bruce Findler
(24 Sep 2002 17:07 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Anthony Carrico
(25 Sep 2002 14:34 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT
Anthony Carrico
(25 Sep 2002 15:13 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT Robert Bruce Findler (25 Sep 2002 16:07 UTC)
|
Re: cmdline.ss library in PLT Robert Bruce Findler 25 Sep 2002 16:07 UTC
At Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:15:47 -0400 (EDT), Anthony Carrico wrote: > Given this existing idiom, is it worth upsetting the status quo with a new > feature? Would it confuse application users, who probably expect the old > idiom? Yes, all good points. the cmdline.ss library avoids this problem by requiring spaces: -xall is the same as -x -a -l -l not the same as -x all regardless of the comandline specification. Also, it doesn't use the --long-name=x it still uses spaces, ie: --long-name x so that would be further incompatability. Robby