On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 06:53:04PM -0700, Taylor Blau wrote: > > I understand that you're doing this to avoid complaining about "--int > > --type=int", but exactly how that case is supported should be an > > implementation detail; it doesn't need to bleed into the UI as an > > unnecessary and not-well-justified loosening of an age-old > > restriction. There are other ways to support "--int --type=int" > > without "last wins". Also, do we really need to support "--int > > --type=int"? Is that an expected use-case? > > This is a fair concern, though I view the problem slightly differently. > I see this change as being motivated by the fact that we are adding > "--type", not removing an age-old restriction. > > Peff's motivation for this--as I understand it--is that "--type=int" > should be a _true_ synonym for "--int". Adopting the old-style > "OPT_SET_BIT" for this purpose makes "--type=int" and "--int" _mostly_ a > synonym for one another, except that "--type=bool --type=int" will not > complain, whereas "--bool --int" would. > > Loosening this restriction, in my view, brings us closer (1) to the new > semantics of multiple "--type"'s, and (2) to the existing semantics of > "--verbose=1 --verbose=2" as you mentioned above. > > I would like to hear Peff's take on this as well, since he suggested the > patch originally, and would likely provide the clearest insight into > this. I think you've captured it fairly well. The options _are_ semantically linked, in that they are all mutually-exclusive types. Obviously we could continue to flag errors, and even catch "--type=int --type=bool" in the same way if we really wanted to (by using a custom parse-options callback). So I think the primary value here is in the code cleanup. Even without the new "--type" option, avoiding the bitset makes the code clearer (IMHO). I do agree that a user saying "--int --bool" is almost certainly an error, and they'd be just as happy to see an error message as to get the last-one-wins behavior. But I also doubt that it comes up very much either way. -Peff
