Re: [Boost-users] program_options positional and required arguments

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] program_options positional and required arguments
From: Yang Zhang (yanghatespam_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-09 05:02:50

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Vladimir Prus
<vladimir_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Yang Zhang wrote:
>
>> I had to add the exe option to the regular (non-positional)
>> options_description as a vector<wstring>, causing it to show up as an
>> option in the usage message.
>
> You can create a hidden options group and put 'exe' there.
>
>> Omitting it resulted in errors about the
>> option being unregistered (even after trying to add
>> allow_unregistered). Why would I get this error?
>
> Because you say that all positional options should become values of the
> 'exe' option -- that you did not define.

But I *do* define it, in the positional_options_description....

If you look at the code, notice that "exe" has to be defined twice, in
two different description objects.

>
>> Shouldn't the
>> wcommand_line_parser::run method be doing this checking after it has
>> collected all the sets of option descriptions? Can I get rid of this?
>> What's the proper way to express what I want?

I guess these questions still stand. And the only suggested change to
do things "properly" is to make "exe" hidden? Besides, can't a user
still perform --exe blah, even if it's hidden from the usage message?
-- 
Yang Zhang
http://www.mit.edu/~y_z/