Subject: Re: [boost] [ANN] CLI 1.1.0 released
From: Maurizio Vitale (maurizio.vitale_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-16 10:50:30
>>>>> "Boris" == Boris Kolpackov <boris_at_[hidden]> writes:
Boris> Hi Rutger, Rutger ter Borg <rutger_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> look interesting, but I must admit that I was confused by the
>> name. To me, a CLI is either the user interface or the
>> interpreter, whereas I think you are covering something that has
>> to do with command-line arguments or program options.
Boris> One of the expansions of the CLI acronym is Command-Line
Boris>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface
But if I understand your project, it is not a CLI, rather a compiler
that takes a description of command line options/flags and _generates_
code that handle the command line interface, hence the confusion.
>> Are you considering to pursue inclusion in Boost
Boris> There is already a "solution" for this problem in Boost
Boris> (program_options) though the implementations are very
Boris> different ("library" vs "compiler" approach). So I am not
Boris> sure if there is interest in an alternative.
Probably not, although I can only speak for myself.
The present boost library has the nice property of being C++. If one
wanted to go the script route, there're dozens of alternatives.
Which brings the question: why exactly this keep being advertised on the
boost mailing lists? Most people here follows freshmeat and sourceforge
announcements and I don't think we want to see here posts on every and
each script out there that happens to generate C++ code.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk