On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:58 PM, aria42 <ari...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Couldn't it have access to the other bindings so far like let? And > then just have the order of options reflect the partial order induced > by dependency? So is this possible... > > (with-command-line *command-line-args* > "my-program" > [[size "The size of something" #(if % (Integer/parseInt %) 99)] > [picture "Path to Picture" #(load-picture % size)]] > (do-stuff-with-picture))
I guess I'm not convinced it's good to have code mixed in with the command-line specs like that. Can you show me your real-world example? > Also, other suggestions might be being able to declare an option or > conditional dependencies. Ideally we could have lots > of optional keyword arguments :default, :required, :depends, etc... > > This is probably more heavy than most people use, but I would > definitely find it useful. There are certainly plenty of features that could be added, and I'm not at all opposed to that. But every feature added to the API will be painful to change later as it might break people's code, so I'd like to add features slowly and carefully. Thanks for the ideas. --Chouser --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
