Re: Non-patch: Option arguments

[Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:
> A couple of points which you may or may not have thought of.
> Will there now be an easier way for precommand modifiers to take
> options. We could particularly do with this for command where a couple
> of the options (-v was it) should be accepted by the posix definition
> but it would also be useful in a couple of other cases for bash/ksh
> compatibility (exec perhaps). I forget what the problem was previously
> with this.

I think this is a different issue, but actually I'm not sure this is
that difficult.

> We may need a bit of care over how `-' and `--' options are handled.
> Taking Chet Ramey's recent message on -users, I was wondering whether
> printf (to take a particular example but it may be applicable to others)
> should ignore an initial `--' argument.

Yes, this is a bit like cd.  Various things like this will need tidying
up later.  There's no code at the moment to handle `--' even if other
arguments looking like options are being passed straight through is
arguments.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.  
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************