RE: [help-gengetopt] option group with exclusion

[Gyozo, PAPP (VBuster)]

Hi,

as you can see in one of following message we alread got rid of this stuff in a 
more usable way. 
Briefly, --exclude may appear with either of the other three option or alone in 
which case the program uses the built-in default filename patterns except which 
is given in --exclude.

But to react your suggestion, it would be very handy if gengetopt could manage 
"option dependence" even though it is unneccessary in this case now. (BTW, my 
first suggestion was close to yours however I was unable to interpret it so 
well to the audience. ;)

" -----Original Message-----
" From: Lorenzo Bettini [mailto:address@hidden
" Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 5:39 PM
" To: Users list for gengetopt
" Subject: Re: [help-gengetopt] option group with exclusion
" 
" 
" Gyozo, PAPP (VBuster) wrote:
" > Hi there,
" > 
" > currently I'm struggling to implement an interface which is 
" basically a mutually exlcusive group of option with a little 
" exception two of the four options are allowed to appear at 
" the same time.
" > 
" > Consider the following situation, there are 4 options:
" > 
" > --all-files
" > --pattern
" > --include
" > --exclude
" > 
" > the rules which cannot be changed because this was what the 
" customer wanted actually:
" > 1.)--all-files should not be used neither of the remaining 
" 3 options.
" > 2.)--pattern should not be used neither of the remaining 3 options.
" > 3.) BUT --exclude and --include can be used at the same time.
" > 
" > Apart from the last term this could be easily implemented 
" as a option group. But how to modify gengetopt to be able to 
" handle such a situation? I've added some code around 
" gengetopt calls in my application, but I feel it is worth 
" discussing this problem. May gengetopt address such 
" functionality, too?
" > 
" > 
" 
" Hi there
" 
" and sorry for the long silence (very busy days :-)
" 
" If I got it right, you'd need a way to have options that are 
" common to 
" more than one mutually exclusive group?
" As I understand such options would still make sense only if given 
" together with options of these groups?
" If so, probably the best way to implement so would be to have options 
" that require other options (or other groups as in this case).
" 
" what do you think?
" 
" Lorenzo
" 
" -- 
" +-----------------------------------------------------+
" |  Lorenzo Bettini          ICQ# lbetto, 16080134     |
" |  PhD in Computer Science                            |
" |  Dip. Sistemi e Informatica, Univ. di Firenze       |
" |  Tel +39 055 4237441, Fax +39 055 4237437           |
" |  Florence - Italy        (GNU/Linux User # 158233)  |
" |  Home Page        : http://www.lorenzobettini.it    |
" |  http://music.dsi.unifi.it         XKlaim language  |
" |  http://www.lorenzobettini.it/purple    Cover Band  |
" |  http://www.gnu.org/software/src-highlite           |
" |  http://www.gnu.org/software/gengetopt              |
" |  http://www.lorenzobettini.it/software/gengen       |
" |  http://www.lorenzobettini.it/software/doublecpp    |
" +-----------------------------------------------------+
" 
" 
" 
" _______________________________________________
" Help-gengetopt mailing list
" address@hidden
" http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gengetopt
"