From: David A. Greene (greened_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-18 16:14:21
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> I'm currently in process of writing a code that is intended to deal with all
> the options style that I've aware of. So far it looks like some
> disambiguation decisions must be made and somebody might not like them. On
> the other hand, I don't see much implementation problems.
I look forward to your results. It's good that folks are starting
to dig more deeply into this.
> fewer way of tweaking syntax than I'd like). If I succeed, then there will be
> a flexible command line parser with only a few dependencies on standard
> headers, which will be usable separately and as low-level part for the
> already-written semantic part. I think that in this case there simply won't
> be a reason to use Spirit.
David Held makes a good case for using Spirit: commonality. But
let's crunch the numbers and see what we get.
-- "Some little people have music in them, but Fats, he was all music, and you know how big he was." -- James P. Johnson
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk