Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20021221185540.027a74a8@pop3.cris.com> X-Sender: rrschulz AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:00:39 -0800 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Randall R Schulz Subject: Re: what to use in g++ instead of GetOpt? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hello there, Edward, if that is your real name. Here's how it is, Ed... Real Programmers (tm) code to the bare metal. They don't use no stinkin' libraries. If you can't decode your command line arguments without some "support library" (a concept closely related to "support hose"), the Guild of Real Programmers recommends a nice job in investment banking where you'll never trouble your little head and the most damage you can do is to induce abject poverty and homelessness among the thousands of people who don't know about the only law that matters: Caveat Emptor. I hope you found this little lecture informative, enlightening and inspirational. Good luck with those command line arguments. Randall Schulz Disclaimer: The author of this humorous missive writes mostly Java code these days, and hence would not know a Real Programmer if one had a heart attack right in front of him. At 18:51 2002-12-21, Ed wrote: >Howdy all! > >In the old days of libg++ there was something called GetOpt to help >parse command line options. In these days of stdlibc++ it seems to be >gone. > >What are well-dressed C++ programmers using to parse their command >lines these days? > >Thanks! > >Ed -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/