Re: required options

On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 09:01 +0200, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> The manual states that users often want "required (mandatory) options"
> which is contradictory in itself. The manual suggests using positional
> arguments instead.
> 
> I think this is some kind of misunderstanding. Positional arguments
> are often not usable because only the position makes the argument the
> source or the destination for example. It's not always as simple and
> obvious as with "cp" (for instance I always get it wrong with "ln -s
> TARGET LINK_NAME").


Sure they are: here's a revamped ln:

ln -s target TARGET linkname LINK_NAME

where that is four arguments, two fixed value strings, two the user
chooses.... 


if you want to do that, that is. I agree with the Tao though, if
something is mandatory, it is not an 'option'.

Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBBQAE2M4BfeEKYx2ERAvfNAJoC5kwha4SSElGQbXS5TDOUSmHnDwCgsIY0
QbggHnC1oL/3qDv6ctFAX3Y=
=UNXz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----