Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow optional non-Optimist argv. #12

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 19, 2013

Conversation

evocateur
Copy link
Contributor

This allows other arg parsers (e.g., nopt or any other argument parser that gives you a hash of options) to provide the argv that rc consumes. If no custom argv are provided, it trundles along as before with optimist.

@dominictarr
Copy link
Owner

The way this integrates is clean, but I'm not certain what nopt does that optimist doesn't.

What about nopt sold you?

@evocateur
Copy link
Contributor Author

Other than "I was already using it, and don't want to migrate to optimist":

  • Specifying parameters that are always Arrays, even with a single value: { "stuff": [path, Array] }
  • Specifying parameters of an explicit type, or array of types, with the first success determining the choice: { "stringOrDate": [Date, String] }
  • Shorthands that expand to composite longhands: { "s": ["--stuff", "--things", "foo"] }

Also, as @isaacs noted, type verification and custom parsing capabilities.

@dominictarr
Copy link
Owner

After much reflection (noting the way that nopt parses options when using npm, and asking myself what would it be like with optimist?) I have decided to merge this.

dominictarr added a commit that referenced this pull request May 19, 2013
Allow optional non-Optimist argv.
@dominictarr dominictarr merged commit 155b851 into dominictarr:master May 19, 2013
@dominictarr
Copy link
Owner

merged into [email protected]

@evocateur
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks!

@evocateur evocateur deleted the argv-param branch May 20, 2013 19:16
@dominictarr dominictarr mentioned this pull request Dec 27, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants