[comp.windows.x] command line args

RWS@ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU (Robert Scheifler) (11/10/87)

Your complaint about using an embedded colon to identify the display
argument (I notice I naturally call it an argument, not an option :-) is
well taken; I'm not sure why that practice has survived, and it would be
nice to see it disappear.  Some form of -option is perfectly reasonable.

I have no particular argument for or against the use of + and = as
option leaders (although their use would seem to cause no more problems
than the use of -, except that it "violates the standard"), but I note
that you didn't propose how to replace the use of + options.  Most Unix
commands don't allow you to specify the defaults, so maybe the problem
hasn't received widespread attention.

I find the "standard" of single-character options rather appalling.  Why
anyone would codify dismal user-interface design made up long ago by
people who hated to type is beyond me.  This is not to argue that the
current smorgasbord of X interfaces constitutes goodness, just that we
should not cause upheaval merely to move from one evil to another.  I
like having mnemonic multi-character options with the ability to give
unambiguous prefixes; the names are easier to remember, and are more
likely to correspond to those used in other command line environments I
use.  Switching to single-character options will entail a fair amount of
work; lots of options have potential character-clashes, and some
applications like xterm will probably run out of characters, and will
almost certainly have completely non-mnemonic choices.  Non-trivial
indeed.

The -R syntax you propose was already in the works, I believe, although
with a multi-character name like -xrm.

For the record, there has been no real consensus in the replies to date.