Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 23:25:13 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: [CLI] char versus String for option name?
From: John Keyes <jbjk@mac.com>
To: commons-dev <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <3DCE2E1E-3A2A-11D7-977C-00039379521C@mac.com>

I have done some more work on the class diagram
( http://www.integralsource.com/cli/datatype2.gif ).  As you can see by
supporting the choice of 'char' and 'String' as the Option name the
design is much more complex.  Wouldn't it be much better to drop
support for 'char'?  This would simplify the design by reducing the
number of classes:
  . No need for Posix/GnuOption just OptionImpl
  . No need for Posix/GnuArgument just ArgumentImpl
  . reduced number of methods on CommandLine (API not finalized)
  . reduced number of methods on the builder (not specified yet but
    should be very similar to the current approach).

Do people think that dropping support for 'char' would cause much
pain for people?  If a migration script is provided that will update
code that uses the char to use String would that make the pain
acceptable?

Cheers,
-John K
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Jakarta Commons CLI
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/cli


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org