From patrick.bennett at inin.com  Tue Mar 22 18:01:45 2005
From: patrick.bennett at inin.com (Patrick Bennett)
Date: Tue Mar 22 17:57:02 2005
Subject: [Rake-devel] Option parsing
Message-ID: <4240A3D9.9000303@inin.com>

Jim, do you have any plans to switch rake to use optparse for option 
parsing?
The current use of optparse, as well as the insistence that *all* 
options have long *and* short options is proving to be kind of limiting.
There are a number of options I'd like to add (logging options for one) 
for my own purposed that I'd like to simply be --long options only as 
coming up with variations of single letter equivalents just makes it too 
confusing to the user.
The current rake setup doesn't allow this.  I think the current 
requirement that everything be in a long/short options array is partly 
to provide 'help,' but optparse also happens to handle that really well 
already. :)

Cheers,
Patrick Bennett

From jim at weirichhouse.org  Tue Mar 22 18:45:51 2005
From: jim at weirichhouse.org (Jim Weirich)
Date: Tue Mar 22 18:41:49 2005
Subject: [Rake-devel] Option parsing
In-Reply-To: <4240A3D9.9000303@inin.com>
References: <4240A3D9.9000303@inin.com>
Message-ID: <200503221845.51581.jim@weirichhouse.org>

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 06:01 pm, Patrick Bennett wrote:
> Jim, do you have any plans to switch rake to use optparse for option
> parsing?

It's not on my list of things to do on rake, but you raise some good points. 

Are you thinking about the ability of a Rakefile to specify additional 
options?  That would be interesting.

-- 
-- Jim Weirich    jim@weirichhouse.org     http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, 
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
From patrick.bennett at inin.com  Tue Mar 22 18:53:17 2005
From: patrick.bennett at inin.com (Patrick Bennett)
Date: Tue Mar 22 18:48:33 2005
Subject: [Rake-devel] Option parsing
In-Reply-To: <200503221845.51581.jim@weirichhouse.org>
References: <4240A3D9.9000303@inin.com>
	<200503221845.51581.jim@weirichhouse.org>
Message-ID: <4240AFED.7040801@inin.com>

Jim Weirich wrote:

> It's not on my list of things to do on rake, but you raise some good 
> points.
>
>Are you thinking about the ability of a Rakefile to specify additional 
>options?  That would be interesting.
>  
>
Not specifically, but it 'could' be interesting. 
Right now I have it so that any x=y options [actually didn't you add 
this?] on the command line are set in the rakefiles environment, so 
rakefile's can simply do ENV['xxxxx'] checks and have it work whether 
set through the environment or the command-line.
I've also added a number of commands specific to the entire build system 
I've built up around rake ('vaguely' similar in some of the concepts to 
boost.build/jam).  I think I posted some messages about it months ago 
but there was little to no discussion about it.
I've probably got the need for about 6 additional options right now, and 
having to specify all of them as having short aliases makes for a pretty 
confusing option list.
I've added a fair bit to the base rake.rb file actually.  It's 
questionable how much would be generally applicable to the base 'rake' 
project though.

Patrick Bennett