Re: Re: Gengetopt 2.21 enhancement suggestions

> OK so possible solutions are:
> 
> 1. rotate_arg_90
> 2. rotate_enum_90
> 3. ROTATE_90
> 
> any preferences?

Yes, 1 or 2.
I really don't like uppercase because it is usually "reserved" for (preprocessor) macros.

> Actually the proposal of Gyozo, rotate_<value> might fail (though 
> rarely) for the reasons exposed by David

OK, I don't mind it was just an idea to move from the original simple enum prefixes.


> generated code is going; if you take a look at the current version in 
> CVS you'll see lots of usage of void pointers, unions and switch 
> statements (with corresponding casts) to deal with different types... 
> this is why I love C++'s polymorphism and really don't like C ;-)

OK, I'll check it if I have a little time.

Last when I was dealing with gengetopt's source refactoring I had a feeling that using type-specific callbacks may be a good approach. I mean different callbacks for options of type integer, floats and string. But now I don't know how far you have got in refactoring.