Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 10:02:36 +0300
On Tue, 23 May 2023 at 18:13, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via SG15
<sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 2:48 AM Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > [René]
> > > Since msvc understands that single initial dash. It also means it
> > > understands any double-dash option.
> >
> > No, it doesn't mean that.
>
> Can you elaborate on how it doesn't mean that cl.exe can handle double
> dash options easily? Is there something in the option parsing that
> prevents it, technical or other?
I don't think there's a technical difficulty, it's just inconsistent,
since MSVC doesn't do double-dash options
for anything else. So why not just change the "--std-info" to be
"-std-info" instead, the consistency problem for MSVC
goes away, and option parsers on other platforms grok that just fine,
they support long options with a single dash.
<sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 2:48 AM Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > [René]
> > > Since msvc understands that single initial dash. It also means it
> > > understands any double-dash option.
> >
> > No, it doesn't mean that.
>
> Can you elaborate on how it doesn't mean that cl.exe can handle double
> dash options easily? Is there something in the option parsing that
> prevents it, technical or other?
I don't think there's a technical difficulty, it's just inconsistent,
since MSVC doesn't do double-dash options
for anything else. So why not just change the "--std-info" to be
"-std-info" instead, the consistency problem for MSVC
goes away, and option parsers on other platforms grok that just fine,
they support long options with a single dash.
Received on 2023-05-24 07:02:50