Re: Order of Options Processing

From: Byron C. Darrah <bdarr_at_sse.FU.HAC.COM_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199806082252.PAA04794_at_pepperoni.pizza.hac.com>

> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Paradise Cowgirl <minerva_at_phix.com>
>
> Hello, all,
>
> I'm wondering how other people feel about the current
> order of options processing?

I quite agree with your opinion as given below. It is both convenient and generally conventional for programs to treat command-line options as the highest priority, config file options next, and default options last.

--Byron Darrah

> I really prefer it when
> my command line options are *it*, so to speak. When
> something doesn't work quite right, I don't really like
> having to 1) remember that I have a configuration file
> out there (since I've never used one before this
> release - okay, call me lazy ;-) and 2) figure out
> which option(s) in the configuration file (as there
> are quite a few!) are conflicting with my command line
> options.
>
> What are the pros to the current order that I'm missing?
>
> Cheers,
> -Darci
Received on Tue 09 Jun 1998 12:54:54 AM GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat 13 Mar 2010 03:46:11 AM GMT GMT