[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A not quite stylish proposal for command line processing
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: A not quite stylish proposal for command line processing |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:59:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> The problem is that the equivalent (pop command-line-args-left) is the
> only way to pass strings from the shell or elsewhere without having to
> requote them as Lisp strings. (*argv++) might be quite over the top,
> but at least (pop argv) would still be quite concise, much more
> Lispish, and it might make it easier for people to actually find the
> respective variable.
>
> It is a fine method of doing this. If people really want to do this,
> then let's install some such thing.
>
> However, I am not sure that the name `argv' is useful now
> that even most hackers are not C programmers. Does any other
> language use the name `argv'?
Perl has @ARGV, awk has ARGV, Python has sys.argv, bash has $@ (well,
you can't always win), Ruby has ARGV, lua has arg, Java has args[]...
The v in argv has not survived into all script languages (though quite
better than argc), but it makes the variable name safer against
accidental reuse in our flat Lisp namespace.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum