From: 7stud -- <bbxx789_05ss@...>
Date: 2008-02-25T12:00:22+09:00
Subject: Re: OptionParser - no short options or incomplete options

Bryan Richardson wrote:
> I'd just hate for someone to fat-finger a simple option and end up 
> deleting
> an entire database worth of data.  Am I overlooking something?  Also, 
> what
> if I wanted -l to do one thing, and --long_option to do something
> different?  I'm not trying to get on anyone's nerves here, I'm just
> wondering if forcing long options is doable...
> 
> --
> Thanks!
> Bryan

Personally, I think all the optparse modules in any language are more 
trouble than they are worth.  Invariably, you can examine ARGV yourself 
and come up with a solution quicker than trying to figure out how the 
overly complex optparse modules work.

In particular, the ruby optparse module appears to have a design flaw: 
it doesn't send the option that was actually entered to the on() method.


1)  This seems to work:

require 'optparse'

opts = OptionParser.new do |opts|
  opts.on('--long_option') do |val|
    #destroy stuff
    puts "in first on"
  end

  opts.on('--long_optio') do |val|
    #do nothing
    puts "in 2nd on"
  end
end

opts.parse!


2)  Or, you can always do this:

require 'optparse'

puts 'start:'
puts ARGV

prohibited = ['-l', '--l']

ARGV.delete_if do |str_in_argv|
  prohibited.include?(str_in_argv)
end

puts 'end:'
puts ARGV

opts = OptionParser.new do |opts|
  opts.on('--long_option') do |val|
    #destroy stuff
    puts "This won't output for -l or --l short form."
  end
end

opts.parse!




> Also, what
> if I wanted -l to do one thing, and --long_option to 
> do something different? 



require 'optparse'

opts = OptionParser.new do |opts|
  opts.on('--long_option') do |val|
    puts 'in first on'
  end

  opts.on('-l') do |val|
     puts 'in 2nd on'
  end
end

opts.parse!



-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.