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