Re: DOS Options

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@acm.nospam.org>]

Randy Brukardt wrote:
> "Charles H. Sampson" <csampson@inetworld.net> wrote in message
> news:1i9d4ab.twgszk4zp5evN%csampson@inetworld.net...
> ...
>>      This has the effect that it's still necessary to write a parser for
>> Argument (1), something I thought Ada.Command_Line might be taking care
>> of.  I'm talking about the case of multiple slash-headed options jammed
>> against the command:
>>
>>         command/x/y/z
>>
>> I was hoping that Ada.Command_Line would return "/x" as Argument (1),
>> "/y" as Argument (2), etc.
>>
>>      Is the GNAT implementation a reasonable one?  Knowing some of the
>> people at ACT, I suspect that they researched it fully and are doing
>> exactly what is expected for a DOS program.
> 
> Ada.Command_Line is a thinly-veiled wrapper on the normal C "argv/argc"
> mechanism. I think most Ada compilers simply copy that mechanism (that's
> pretty much a requirement on Unix, and it is better for portability on all
> platforms). The fact that that mechanism isn't very useful is not considered
> relevant. (And yes, for the record, Janus/Ada does exactly that for
> Ada.Command_Line. We don't even bother to use Ada.Command_Line for the
> command line processing of our compiler and tools; it is just as easy to
> process starting from the original string.)
> 
>                        Randy.
> 
> 

This got posted 5 times. That's a record, even for you.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"We use a large, vibrating egg."
Annie Hall
44