On Jan 3, 2004, at 06:51, GGarramuno wrote:

> Overall, it is vastly superior and makes all other option parsing
> modules obsolete and primitive, imho.
>
> Among the not so standard features:
> - Allows also using a config file for options and reading parameters
> from other places other than commandline (files, for example).
> - It keeps the flags and docs as a single string (ie. you basically
> type the help string message ONLY and the module extracts the flags
> from that).  It makes for extremely clean code while still allowing
> you to format the help line as you wish.  Help line is provided
> automatically, too, removing special characters or blocks.
> - It supports arbitrary user created types for matching, not just
> string, numerics, etc.
> - For numbers it supports matching positive, negative w or w/o 0.
> - Allows arrays parsing and ranges parsing/expanding.
> - Allows matching parameters with a specific manual regex.
> - It supports all sorts of user shortcuts for flags (not just two).
> - Supports aliases for flags easily.
> - It creates regex code that can be spit out for matching if needed.
> - It allows code blocks to be imbedded (ie. when flags are seen full
> blocks can be parsed with perl, MUCH more powerful ways than other
> similar getopts)
> - Allows case to be ignored on a parameter or globally.
> - Allows options to be exclusive, inclusive, strict, etc.
> - Allows clustering of flags in a couple of forms
> - Allows parameters to be put on a queue, so that they only get
> interpreted after all others have.
> - Can check file parameter to verify their existance.

A lot of those things are provided by the Ruby package optparse (which 
I've used with great effect), and I was wondering if you could compare 
optparse with Getopt-Declare; perhaps Nobu will add the missing 
features :-)

You can find optparse documentation here:

   http://www.ruby-doc.org/stdlib/libdoc/optparse/rdoc/index.html

Thanks,


Nathaniel

<:((><