Re: cmd line stuff (was: CVS update: ...)

Karl Fogel wrote:
>
> No, I think Jonathan wasn't arguing with the idea that the command
> comes before any options or arguments. The command is neither an
> option nor an argument. In other words:
>
> svn [<command>] [<option|argument> ...]

He has to answer that. It was not the way I read him, though.

> Re: Greg Hudson's point that there are a couple of different standards
> here: I rolled on the floor laughing and crying at the same time. :-)

It is what I have always liked about standards, too. ;-)

> But seriously, I think we should (eventually if not immediately)
> support the more flexible GNU way, because it does result in increased
> convenience for the user, and is no more ambiguous than the other way.
> [By the way, CVS, to my surprise, requires that the command options
> come before command arguments.]

That *is* according to the POSIX command line standard.
Long option names are not according to that standard,
which is one big reason why adherence is, well, lax.
Standardization via committee has its hazards....

Cheers,
        Bruce
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:11 2006