Re: About more loose parameter sequence requirement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:17:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> I understand that btrfs-progs introduced restrict parameter/option order
> to distinguish global and sub-command parameter/option.
> 
> However it's really annoying if one just want to append some new options
> to previous command:
> 
> E.g.
> # btrfs check /dev/data/btrfs
> # !! --check-data-csum
> 
> The last command will fail as current btrfs-progs doesn't allow any
> option after parameter.
> 
> 
> Despite the requirement to distinguish global and subcommand
> option/parameter, is there any other requirement for such restrict
> option-first-parameter-last policy?

I'd say that it's a common and recommended pattern. Getopt is able to
reorder the parameters so mixed options and non-options are accepted,
unless POSIXLY_CORRECT (see man getopt(3)) is not set. With the more
strict requirement, 'btrfs' option parser works the same regardless of
that.

> If I could implement a enhanced getopt to allow more loose order inside
> subcomand while still can distinguish global option, will it be accepted
> (if it's quality is acceptable) ?

I think it's not worth updating the parser just to support an IMHO
narrow usecase.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux