supporting multi argument commandline arguments Robert Bruce Findler (25 Sep 2002 21:20 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments sperber@xxxxxx (26 Sep 2002 07:10 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments Anthony Carrico (26 Sep 2002 13:52 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments Robert Bruce Findler (26 Sep 2002 13:58 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments Anthony Carrico (26 Sep 2002 14:05 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments sperber@xxxxxx (26 Sep 2002 14:12 UTC)
Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments Tom Lord (26 Sep 2002 17:22 UTC)

Re: supporting multi argument commandline arguments sperber@xxxxxx 26 Sep 2002 14:12 UTC

>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Carrico <xxxxxx@memebeam.org> writes:

Anthony> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Robert Bruce Findler wrote:

>> Right -- I did see that there, and I posted on an internal PLT mailing
>> list where I met with opposition to requiring the extra quotes:
Anthony> >
>>   -L"first-arg second-arg"
>>   --long-name="first-arg second-arg"
Anthony> >
>> Oh well.

Anthony> I feel for you, I've heard private support for the opposite position off
Anthony> this list too. If anyone is passionate about this issue, speak up on this
Anthony> list please.

I feel somewhat passionately for GNU/POSIX-style command-line
processing.  After a few weeks' absence from PLT Scheme, I usually
have to read the docs to actually believe they've done this
differently from everyone else.  I find PLT's way of doing things
unnecessarily hard to remember.

If the quotes don't pacify the opposition, how-about

--long-name=first-arg,second-arg

or something?

--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla