[boost] Re: Formal Review: Command Line & Config library

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-22 01:42:01

Hi Chuck,

Chuck Messenger wrote:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
>> The formal review of Vladimir Prus' Command Line & Config
>> ("program_options") library starts today, May 21, and will continue until
>> Monday, June 2nd. I will be serving as review manager.
> 
> 
> I've tried out the program_options some -- tried using it in place of my
> own library in a few of my programs.  I made extensive comments, having
> read only the introductory section, and studied the sample code.
> Consider this a test-run for a lazy-ish typical user.  Later, I may
> study the main documentation -- it may be awhile, so I thought I'd dish
> off what I had.
> 
> So as not to spam the list, I've placed my comments in the Boost Wiki --
> see
>
http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Program_Options_Library_Pages

Thanks a lot for such detailed comments! I found all of them to be quite
reasonable. See my replies at 
http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Suggestions_-_Program_Options_Library

> One-line summaries of my suggestions:

And one-line summaries of my replies....

> * Library-managed default values

I think it good idea. Need to flesh some details a bit.

> * parse_command_line() should accept "char **av"

Done.

> * add_options() should be able to parse arguments (also, %args%)

That's a bit controversial. I don't yet see the 100% right approach.

> * Adaptive formatting (first field width)
> * program_name() and %progname%

I'm unsure on both of them. See my comments on Wiki

> * Unified exception class

I think such class exists already.

> * Show sample program output

To be done.

> * Put add_options() ascii args first

It's completely up to reviewers.

> * Mandatory options

Good idea. Output formatting is the only issue with me.

> * Optional "option present" parameter to add_options()

I'd like to see some use cases before adding this feature.

> * add_options() should use references rather than pointers

That's style issue, and I'm not partial. Let's hear other opinions.

> * User exception

If you have practical need to them, I'll add them.

> * Remove unnecessary template parameters

Done.

> * Explain role of "+" in add_options()

Done.

I've uploaded new packages with the changes mentioned as "done" above.

> With the right improvements, I think the library would make a valuable
> addition to Boost, and should be accepted.

Thanks,
Volodya