From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EABE431FAF for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 12:06:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5E1MeDgEbCYO for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 12:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BC0E431FAE for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 12:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40]) by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SZ5GP-00059T-PW; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:05:58 +0100 Received: from 94-192-233-223.zone6.bethere.co.uk ([94.192.233.223] helo=localhost) by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SZ5GP-0004zJ-FR; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:05:57 +0100 From: Mark Walters To: Peter Wang , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] cli: command line parsing: allow default for keyword options In-Reply-To: <20120528233152.GD2331@hili.localdomain> References: <1338106946-7611-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> <1338106946-7611-2-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> <20120528233152.GD2331@hili.localdomain> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.13+55~g992aa73 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 20:05:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87wr3wm8h4.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Sender-Host-Address: 94.192.233.223 X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :) X-QM-Body-MD5: 17348e85adb1b37609a0f97eaae292ee (of first 20000 bytes) X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.8 X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: - X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to determine if it is spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam. This message scored -1.8 points. Summary of the scoring: * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, * medium trust * [138.37.6.40 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com) * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay * domain * 0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 19:06:00 -0000 On Mon, 28 May 2012, Peter Wang wrote: > On Sun, 27 May 2012 09:22:21 +0100, Mark Walters wrote: >> This changes the parsing for "keyword" options so that if the option >> is specified with no argument the argument is parsed as if it were >> passed an empty string. This make it easier to add options to existing >> boolean arguments (the existing --option can default to TRUE). >> --- >> command-line-arguments.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- >> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/command-line-arguments.c b/command-line-arguments.c >> index 76b185f..2fb8a1b 100644 >> --- a/command-line-arguments.c >> +++ b/command-line-arguments.c >> @@ -11,10 +11,15 @@ >> */ >> >> static notmuch_bool_t >> -_process_keyword_arg (const notmuch_opt_desc_t *arg_desc, const char *arg_str) { >> +_process_keyword_arg (const notmuch_opt_desc_t *arg_desc, char next, const char *arg_str) { >> >> const notmuch_keyword_t *keywords = arg_desc->keywords; >> >> + if (next == 0) { >> + /* No keyword given */ >> + arg_str=""; >> + } >> + > > Whitespace. Will fix >> while (keywords->name) { >> if (strcmp (arg_str, keywords->name) == 0) { >> if (arg_desc->output_var) { >> @@ -24,7 +29,10 @@ _process_keyword_arg (const notmuch_opt_desc_t *arg_desc, const char *arg_str) { >> } >> keywords++; >> } >> - fprintf (stderr, "unknown keyword: %s\n", arg_str); >> + if (next!=0) > > Whitespace. Will fix >> + fprintf (stderr, "unknown keyword: %s\n", arg_str); >> + else >> + fprintf (stderr, "option %s needs a keyword\n", arg_desc->name); > > I think "keyword argument" is clearer. I think I agree: the reason I kept it is that the first case is the existing error message. Any comments from anyone? Best wishes Mark