I've just noticed a pattern (in git and the CommandLineParser lib for .NET) for verb-style command arguments, and wondering if someone can confirm:
myprog dothis -a "someArg"
-a
--arg
What's the difference between the single-dash-prefix and the double-dash-prefix? Is the single dash prefix always for a single-letter argument specifier, where a double dash prefix always for a "long name" of the argument?
Is there a formal convention somewhere that drives this, or is it a generally accepted informal practice? (or am I just making something of nothing?)
Just curious... the I had never noticed the pattern in git and the CommandLineParser docs are pretty thin and some blog post or another implicated the convention.
(for that matter... what's this style of verb/args even called? I can't seem to find much of anything on it)
From the wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface
Option conventions in Unix-like systems
In Unix-like systems, the ASCII hyphen-minus begins options; the new
(and GNU) convention is to use two hyphens then a word (e.g. --create)
to identify the option's use while the old convention (and still
available as an option for frequently-used options) is to use one
hyphen then one letter (e.g. -c); if one hyphen is followed by two or
more letters it may mean two options are being specified, or it may
mean the second and subsequent letters are a parameter (such as
filename or date) for the first option.
Two hyphen-minus characters without following letters (--) may
indicate that the remaining arguments should not be treated as
options, which is useful for example if a file name itself begins with
a hyphen, or if further arguments are meant for an inner command (e.g.
sudo). Double hyphen-minuses are also sometimes used to prefix "long
options" where more descriptive option names are used. This is a
common feature of GNU software. The getopt function and program, and
the getopts command are usually used for parsing command-line options.
There is posix convention and getopt
But it's not always the case, e.g. java and find.
See also:
https://golang.org/pkg/flag/
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javafx/api/javafx/application/Application.Parameters.html
Related
In git, if we want to exclude a file from diff output (on bash) we do something like follows:
git diff -- !(file.txt)
But this is disallowed in powershell. Hence is there a way to achieve this in the powershell prompt?
Simply single-quote your argument:
git diff -- '!(file.txt)'
Single-quoting makes PowerShell treat the string literally and prevents it from interpreting chars. such as ( as its own metacharacters.
Before invoking the target program, PowerShell re-quotes arguments if and as needed, behind the scenes; that is:
It encloses an argument in "..." if it contains whitespace, and also in certain, less common scenarios (see link below).
It passes it without quotes otherwise.
Note: There are pitfalls associated with this invisible re-quoting - see this answer.
Many man pages and --help option use a format for describing the command line options of the documented utilities. For instance, for the cd shell command:
cd [-L | -P] [directory]
cd -
I'd like to parse these descriptions. Is there a model or formal format (even if it is not widely accepted)?
I've seen that at least python's argparse (http://pymotw.com/2/argparse/) can generate something like that.
Some details about the notation used for the SYNOPSIS section can be found in the man manual:
The following conventions apply to the SYNOPSIS section and can be used as a guide in
other sections.
bold text type exactly as shown.
italic text replace with appropriate argument.
[-abc] any or all arguments within [ ] are optional.
-a|-b options delimited by | cannot be used together.
argument ... argument is repeatable.
[expression] ... entire expression within [ ] is repeatable.
Exact rendering may vary depending on the output device. For instance, man will
usually not be able to render italics when running in a terminal, and will typically
use underlined or coloured text instead.
The command or function illustration is a pattern that should match all possible
invocations. In some cases it is advisable to illustrate several exclusive
invocations as is shown in the SYNOPSIS section of this manual page.
There are further details in the the POSIX Utility Syntax Guidelines.
Many libraries to parse the command line options can generate the synopsis section (e.g. take a look at boost::program_options).
A typical format for command line arguments is:
myApp --myArg=myValue
What if I want to pass in a set of key value pairs through the command line? Something like:
myApp --myList={arg1=val1;arg2=val2;arg3=val3...}
Since there seems to be no standard for this sort of thing, can anyone provide examples from well-used utilities that have this sort of command line argument input? I poked around some man pages but didn't find any.
Edit: I'm wondering both how the input should be formatted and what the help text might look like.
I think it largely depends on how you parse the arguments in your program.
Here are some examples that the programs accept multiple key-value pair values.
man php:
--define foo[=bar]
-d foo[=bar] Define INI entry foo with value bar
man git:
-c <name>=<value>
Pass a configuration parameter to the command. The value given will
override values from configuration files. The <name> is expected in
the same format as listed by git config (subkeys separated by
dots).
For both, one can pass multiple -d or -c arguments to the programs which gives you the ability to supply a list of key-value pairs to the programs.
IMO, it's not a big problem having your own style of accepting lists of key-value pairs for your program as long as it works and is well-documented. :)
P.S.: I think this question would be more appropriate be placed on Programmers Stack Exchange rather than on SO. See here and here.
If the app needs so many arguments, I would use a config file instead of passing them in command line:
myApp --config=file.cnf
This approach has the following advantages:
flexibility - you can have a bunch of configs prepared for different invocations, and just use them,
no problems with quoting - it's always painful if command line arguments have spaces, double quotes, <, >, or other special characters,
simplicity - you control the config file format, it can be for example INI, JSON, XML etc. It's easy to create it and as easy to parse as parsing command line -- if not easier,
security - if any argument may be sensitive, it's not visible from tools displaying command line arguments.
What's the best package for finding a string in multiple files in EMACS. I know about grep and such but I would like something that is a little smoother to operate.
There are three builtin functions for grepping in Emacs: grep, find-grep (or grep-find) and rgrep.
The first two work by letting the user edit the grep command line directly.
I usually use the third, rgrep, from "recursive grep". It's a little friendlier, as it prompts the user for the search parameters (search string, file types and directory) one by one, provides customizable defaults, and it automatically ignores some common files and directories you usually don't want to search, like for example .svn or .o files.
Then, there is ack, and its interface for Emacs: ack.el, whose default behavior is similar to rgrep, but can be customized to use the options that ack provides.
Just in case you haven't read it already - there's lots of relevant tips over at the EmacsWiki GrepMode page.
Dired mode also lets you do a search through marked files with the dired-do-search function.
And ibuffer lets you do emacs' generic isearch through a bunch of buffers using the awkward key sequence M-s a C-s.
As an alternative, I find dired-modehelpful, especially when used with either dired-mark-files-regexp (%m) or dired-mark-files-containing-regexp to select what should be searched and then dired-do-search (A).
Depends what you mean by find a string. As others have mentioned, grep is very good at what it does. I use it all the time, everyday.
But if your "string" is, say, a sequence of words within a sentence (which can be multi-line), then grep might not be what you want.
Another tool for searching across multiple files or buffers (or bookmarks) is Icicles search. The general idea is that it first parses the files into search contexts according to some definition (e.g. a regexp), and then it searches for matches to your current minibuffer input (changing the search hits dynamically as you edit your input).
Whereas grep always uses lines as search contexts, with Icicles search you are not limited in how you define the contexts to search. The contexts need not partition (exhaust) the file; they can cover as much or as little of the file text as you want.
Among other possibilities, you can use Emacs thing-at-point definitions for various kinds of THING as the search contexts. For example, you can use command icicles-search-thing with sentence as the THING type, to use sentences as the search contexts.
Or you can use character-property zones as search contexts: search all zones that are font-locked with a given set of faces, for instance. There are many possibilities.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Icicles_-_Search_Commands%2c_Overview
I'm trying to understand someone else's Perl code without knowing much Perl myself. I would appreciate your help.
I've encountered a Perl function along these lines:
MyFunction($arg1,$arg2__size,$arg3)
Is there a meaning to the double-underscore syntax in $arg2, or is it just part of the name of the second argument?
There is no specific meaning to the use of a __ inside of a perl variable name. It's likely programmer preference, especially in the case that you've cited in your question. You can see more information about perl variable naming here.
As in most languages underscore is just part of an identifier; no special meaning.
But are you sure it's Perl? There aren't any sigils on the variables. Can you post more context?
As far as the interpreter is concerned, an underscore is just another character allowed in identifiers. It can be used as an alternative to concatenation or camel case to form multi-word identifiers.
A leading underscore is often used to mean an identifier is for local use only, e.g. for non-exported parts of a module. It's merely a convention; the interpreter doesn't care.
In the context of your question, the double underscore doesn't have any programmatic meaning. Double underscores does mean something special for a limited number of values in Perl, most notably __FILE__ & __LINE__. These are special literals that aren't prefixed with a sigil ($, % or #) and are only interpolated outside of quotes. They contain the full path & name of the currently executing file and the line that is being executed. See the section on 'Special Literals' in perldata or this post on Perl Monks
I'm fairly certain arg2__size is just the name of a variable.
Mark's answer is of course correct, it has no special meaning.
But I want to note that your example doesn't look like Perl at all. Perl variables aren't barewords. They have the sigils, as you will see from the links above. And Perl doesn't have "functions", it has subroutines.
So there may be some confusion about which language we're talking about.
You will need to tell the interpreter that "$arg2" is the name of a variable. and not "$arg2__size". For this you will need to use the parenthesis. (This usage is similar to that seen in shell).
This should work
MyFunction($arg1,${arg2}__size,$arg3)
--Binu