Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!dual!mordor!ut-sally!jsq
From: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP (John Quarterman)
Newsgroups: mod.std.unix
Subject: Re: command line arguments
Message-ID: <2244@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 15:56:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.2244
Posted: Tue Jul  2 15:56:12 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 18:46:49 EDT
References: <2210@ut-sally.UUCP> <2226@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 30
Approved: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP

From: utastro!nather (Ed Nather)

>      Frank da Cruz's new C-Kermit adopts a set of command line argument
> standards that are worth looking at. 
> [...]
> A group of bundled options may end with an option that has an argument.

This creates confusion in using C-Kermit when you want to send an image
file.  For example:

	send -is filename     < ---  works fine
        send -si filename     < ---  bombs the program

I personally find it hard to remember which is which, since they both seem
equally sensible to me.  I would *much* prefer to bundle the flags, then
have those with arguments pick them up in the same order as the flags are
listed.  In the above case, the "-i" flag doesn't take an argument, so I
think it should be processed but should not "shield" the "-s" flag from its
argument.

But what do I know?

Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA

-- 

John Quarterman, jsq@ut-sally.ARPA, {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!jsq