On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:51:52PM +0000, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Unrelated but worth to note: many parse_options users just don't care > > about argv[0] and having it kept each time would rather be a pain for > > them (they would need to call argv++, argc-- themselves). > > Not necessarily. If they were parsing by hand, they were written to deal > with the fact that argv[0] is not the program argument (iow, they start > counting from one). And before and after calling parse_options(), they > need to change that assumption anyway, because parse_options() makes > argv[0] disappear. Sure, but for _some_ commands it's easier not having to argv++, argc--. The patch I sent just allow the caller to ask parse_options to keep argv[0] in place or not, so that one can cascade parsers if wanted. Note that with the series I sent, it's less useful to cascade option parser, you rather mix more of them in your step by step parser. But oh well, it's a useful feature anyways. We can even make it default, my sole concern what that NULL-terminated thing, and now that I know we can count on it, then, well, I absolutely don't care :) -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp4ezikbMGDl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
