gcl-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gcl-devel] command line arguments


From: Jared C. Davis
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] command line arguments
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:15:10 -0500

Hi,

Thanks Camm, I'll try it out!

Cheers,
Jared

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Camm Maguire <address@hidden> wrote:
> Greetings!  I went ahead and put this into the Version_2_6_9pre tag.  If
> it works for you and you can drop me a note, that would be great!
>
> Take care,
>
> "Jared C. Davis" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to write a wrapper function that provides uniform access to
>> the command-line arguments of Lisp programs across many Lisps.
>>
>> In CCL (and also in Allegro, CLISP, CMUCL, SBCL, mutatis mutandis), one can 
>> do:
>>
>>    $ cat myprog-ccl
>>    #!/bin/sh
>>    exec ccl -I myprog.ccl -K ISO-8858-1 -e "(myprog::main)" -- "$@"
>>
>> The options that come before the special "--" argument here are "for
>> the Lisp", and options after it are "for my program."
>>
>> This is especially nice because there is no ambiguity:
>>   #1. If my program takes its own -I switch, that's okay: the LIsp
>> isn't going to get confused and think that I'm telling it to use some
>> other image.
>>   #2. If my program doesn't have its own -K switch, that's fine: the
>> Lisp isn't going to send that option to the program, because it's an
>> option for the Lisp.
>>
>> Does GCL have any command-line switch similar to "--"?
>>
>>>From the man page, it almost sounds like I want to use -f.  But that
>> seems to do something strange involving reading files, and so it
>> doesn't seem quite right.
>>
>> If there is no such option, I guess I can at least write my wrapper
>> script along the following lines:
>>
>>   $ cat myprog-gcl
>>   #!/bin/sh
>>   exec myprog.gcl -eval "(myprog::main)" -- "$@"
>>
>> Then, in my program, I could at least throw out everything before the
>> "--" in si::*command-args*.
>>
>> This would at least give me the good behavior #2.  But since GCL would
>> still be processing all of the arguments, it doesn't seem like it
>> solves #1.  For instance, if my program has its own options with names
>> like -f, -dir, -eval, etc., then GCL will think are options for it,
>> and then would presumably try to do crazy things.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Jared
>
> --
> Camm Maguire                                        address@hidden
> ==========================================================================
> "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah



-- 
Jared C. Davis <address@hidden>
11410 Windermere Meadows
Austin, TX 78759
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/jared/



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]