On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 3:21 PM Jon Steinhart
<jon(a)fourwinds.com> wrote:
opinion, it doesn't add value to do
something that's already been done
but differently; it detracts from value because now there's yet another
competing way to do something.
You mean like not using getopt and rolling your own? Shrug.
while ((i = getopt(argc, argv, "xxxxx:xxxx")) != -1)
switch (i) {
case ....
}
argc -= optind;
argv += optind;
So I never got getopt(). One of my rules is that I don't use a library
in cases where the number of lines of gunk that
that it takes to use a
library function is >= the number of lines to just write it myself.
I don't know, what lines in the above are extra beyond what you write?
last two if being generous I suppose.
Well, in my opinion that's not really an accurate representation of using
getopt.
I would of course write the #include line, and the table of options, which
would
end up being >= the number of lines that it takes me to do this...
while (--argc > 0) {
if (*(++argv)[0] == '-') {
for (p = *argv + 1; *p != '\0'; p++) {
switch (*p) {