Re: Comments on setopt

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > - While I don't mind it really, I can imagine that others might object
  > >   to the "long" name, when compared to setq.  Would a default alias like
  > >   "seto" or "setc" be worth it or not?

  > I think setopt is enough.  "seto" might be confused with oset, while I
  > don't immediately see what "setc" is supposed to represent.

Setting a command line option is not especially common.
I don't think it calls for a name of only 6 characters -- if I were
choosing one afresh, I think I would choose `set-command-option'.

The only reason to use `setopt' is to for parallelism with `getopt'.


-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)