implicit() in program_options::value_semantic
Program options library overview doc illustrates using implicit() for specifying 0 or 1 token value, but this function does not seem to be present in reference doc or source files (as of 1.33.1).
Alterman, Eugene wrote:
Program options library overview doc illustrates using implicit() for specifying 0 or 1 token value, but this function does not seem to be present in reference doc or source files (as of 1.33.1).
Yes, that method was removed on 2005-04-22. The motivation is that it just leads to parsing ambiguities and no good command line interface I ever seen uses optional values. - Volodya
Vladimir, I tried escaping line breaks in a config file with '\' but to no avail. Is there any way of specifying options over multiple lines? Would this be something you would consider as an enhancement to boost::program_options? Thanks, James -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Vladimir Prus Sent: 08 December 2005 07:18 To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] implicit() in program_options::value_semantic Alterman, Eugene wrote:
Program options library overview doc illustrates using implicit() for specifying 0 or 1 token value, but this function does not seem to be present in reference doc or source files (as of 1.33.1).
Yes, that method was removed on 2005-04-22. The motivation is that it just leads to parsing ambiguities and no good command line interface I ever seen uses optional values. - Volodya _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
"Vladimir Prus"
Alterman, Eugene wrote:
Program options library overview doc illustrates using implicit() for specifying 0 or 1 token value, but this function does not seem to be present in reference doc or source files (as of 1.33.1).
Yes, that method was removed on 2005-04-22. The motivation is that it just
Shouldn't the docs be updated accordingly then? There is also an example in the same Overview doc where parse_config_file() is called incorrectly with a file name string as a first argument (instead of istream) .
participants (4)
-
Alterman, Eugene -
Eugene Alterman
-
James E Taylor -
Vladimir Prus