From: Tony Han Bao (tonybao_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-06 18:41:49
On 6 Dec 2004, at 13:12, Caleb Epstein wrote:
>> RAR 3.41 Copyright (c) 1993-2004 Alexander Roshal 2 Nov 2004
> Please do not hold up RAR as a shining example of how command line
> options should be specified or parsed. It is right up there with
> "tar" and "dd" in terms of its cryptic and unconventional command line
My idea was that a program could take both commands and options on the
command line. Commands cause the program to "react" immediately as they
were read in the order that they were specified whereas options set the
environment for the reaction and govern it. For demonstration purpose,
I simply used RAR as an example which clearly mixes commands and
options for one program.
This interpretation may not be so common but I do believe it's worthy
of further discussion.
While we are on the topic, I'm curious, which utility should be hold up
as a shining example? Does one that satisfies all even exist?
> Unlike those venerable utilities, however, it was not written before
> these conventions became common,
This may be true...
> so it has no excuse for this
But since when does providing alternative needs an excuse.
Criticism on its own resolves nothing. They should be accompanied with
suggestions which eventually lead to improvements. After all, we are
all here for one reason: help perfect boost and in turn perfect
Tony Han Bao
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk