Akim Demaille wrote:
> You raise the problem of service interaction between a. applications'
> defaults, b. WARNINGS, c. command line options.
>
> There are several options:
>
>
> i Cumulative:
> Honor a + b + c (user should use `none' or `nosth' to remove
> something in a or b).
>
>
> ii Cumulative defaults:
> Honor c if given, otherwise a + b.
>
>
> iii Chain:
> Honor c if given otherwise b otherwise a.
There's probably a fourth option (which I dislike ;-):
iv Cumulative user:
Honor c + b if given, otherwise a
> I personally prefer iii.
While I also prefer iii in the current state of autoconf (in which
warnings disabling is not supported, I do prefer i (full accumulation) as a
general scheme, because both the command like options and the WARNINGS env var
are actually set by the same user. Moreover, with the i scheme, you can
emulate iii by starting b (or c) with `none'. I think it is on the contrary
much more painful to emulate i from the iii scheme.
> We need a full specification, for instance we must decide whether several
> --warnings accumulate ---IMHO, they should.
Yes.
> Also, it should be case insensitive (think of POSIX for instance).
Yes.
--
/ / _ _ Didier Verna http://www.inf.enst.fr/~verna/
- / / - / / /_/ / EPITA / LRDE mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/_/ / /_/ / /__ / 14-16 rue Voltaire Tel. +33 (1) 44 08 01 77
94276 Kremlin-Bicêtre cedex Fax. +33 (1) 44 08 01 99
