Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tools: Ambiguity in option names #65

Open
tombentley opened this issue Feb 4, 2014 · 1 comment
Open

tools: Ambiguity in option names #65

tombentley opened this issue Feb 4, 2014 · 1 comment

Comments

@tombentley
Copy link
Collaborator

Originally created at Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:16:59 GMT in ceylon/ceylon-common#29:

At the moment the option parsing is very strict about the order of options with respect to the tool it belongs to. For instance the top level ceylon tool (the one which runs subcommands) accepts a --stacktraces option, so

ceylon --stacktrace compile ...

is ok, but

ceylon compile --stacktraces ...

is not. Likewise for (sub)*tools.

The benefit of this is I can later add an option to a tool without it conflicting with options of sub- or parent tools. The drawbacks are:

  • it's really not very user friendly,
  • it's not even obvious and
  • conventionally the order of options shouldn't matter.

So I think we should change it. To do so, we'll need a way to add options to the top level tool without causing conflicts with subtools.

@quintesse
Copy link

Originally commented at Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:48:03 GMT:

To be honest, I don't think we should worry about enforcing that one way or the other. Almost all tools will be made by us, certainly now, so we just elect not to have conflicting names. If in the future people start making their own tools there might come a time where this becomes more relevant, but I don't think the toplevel tool will need many more options so the chance they'll conflict is not too great. For now I'd just not worry about it and just say: toplevel tool comes first, if a subtool has the same option... change the subtool

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants