[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: guile -s is it necessary?
From: |
Paul Jarc |
Subject: |
Re: guile -s is it necessary? |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Oct 2002 15:41:19 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) |
address@hidden wrote:
> Is there any particular reason (besides of higher symmetry)
> you have to invoke a script as ``guile -s <script name>''
> instead of just ``guile <script name>''?
Ok, I thought of another possible problem. Suppose a program wants to
invoke guile to process a script. If -s is required, then the program
will use it. If -s is optional, the programmer will be tempted to use
the plain "guile $script_name" form, which will be buggy if
script_name can start with "-". Also consider code that parses a
guile command line - say, a wrapper around guile. That code will also
have to be updated to accomodate making -s optional.
As it is, we can know what each argument is (i.e., a switch, a script
name, or a script argument) without looking at the contents of the
argument; we only need to look at the preceding arguments. I think
that's valuable.
paul
- Re: guile -s is it necessary?, (continued)
Re: guile -s is it necessary?, Joshua Judson Rosen, 2002/10/20
Re: guile -s is it necessary?,
Paul Jarc <=