[boost] Re: CLA/Config file library opinion
by Gennadiy Rozental other posts by this author
May 29 2003 10:41AM messages near this date
[boost] Re: CLA/Config file library opinion
|
[boost] Re: CLA/Config file library opinion
"Vladimir Prus" <ghost@[...].su> wrote in message
news:bb4n6o$pfk$1@[...]..
> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>
> >> And one important point: there are only three unnamed parameters.
There's
> > a
> >> bunch of other things that can be configured, and they all use *named*
> >> interface:
> >>
> >> desc.add_options()
> >> ("output", "file", "output file name").default_value("/tmp/abc")
> >> ;
> >
> > The question arize: Why do you prefer option description to defalt
value,
> > optional and other modifiers (I still could not reveal the mystery of
> > second parameter, so couldn't comment here). I prefer treat them all
same
> > way.
>
> I though I've told it to you previously: because uniform syntax will be
much
> more verbose....
I would not say "much more". From what I view the only difference is
'description' modifier.
> - Volodya
Gennadiy.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
|