Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!eci386!jmm
From: jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: getopt
Message-ID: <1989Jun19.153426.21238@eci386.uucp>
Date: 19 Jun 89 15:34:26 GMT
References: <782@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> <13730@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Reply-To: jmm@eci386.UUCP (John Macdonald)
Organization: R. H. Lathwell Associates: Elegant Communications, Inc.
Lines: 24

In article <13730@haddock.ima.isc.com> karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes:
}In article <782@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
}>I have a program which needs an option which may have either a default
}>value or a specific value. ie. "-c" or "-c4" would be typical. I would
}>like to use getopt to read the values.
}
}This doesn't fit the Official Arg Passing Style, so even if you use a hook a
}kludge into getopt(), it isn't guaranteed to always work.
}
} [...]
}
}"-#" is a not uncommon debugging option.  I think ";" is a better choice,
}since it does half of what ":" does%, and because I don't know of any code
}that uses "-;" as an option.
}
}Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint
}________
}% This pun works only if you pronounce them as "semicolon" and "colon".

Surely it would be better (except for punning purposes) to use -? to indicate
an optional argument.  Getopt precludes having a useful ? option since the
return of ? indicates an error occurred.  The ? is also suggests that the
option is "conditionally present".