From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:39:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] bundle: rewrite builtin to use parse-options
Message-ID: <CALkWK0nCuFgS8PKkQLMzqpBsOWouSs5y=CEKS1r0x0=LkhqC9A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111208175913.GK2394@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net>

Hi,

Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> What's the desired behavior?  Then we can talk about how to implement it.
>
> If the goal is "use parse-options for a command that has subcommands",
> see builtin/notes.c.

Uses strcmp() to match argv[0].  And you can't specify the options for
a certain subcommand before the subcommand itself on the command-line,
although I don't consider this a serious limitation.  I was going for
something prettier with subcommand-specific help text, albeit a
serious limitation.  I'll try working towards this for a few more
hours to see if anything useful comes out of it -- otherwise, I'll
just drop this patch and focus on eliminating the ugliness in
builtin/revert.c around '--continue', '--quit' parsing.

That being said, do you see value in lifting the restriction on
opts->long_name and PARSE_OPTS_NODASH not allowed together?  The
restriction seems quite arbitrary, but I can't justify lifting it
unless I can show some valid usecase.

Thanks.

-- Ram