Our great sponsors
-
-
WorkOS
The modern identity platform for B2B SaaS. The APIs are flexible and easy-to-use, supporting authentication, user identity, and complex enterprise features like SSO and SCIM provisioning.
-
gflags
The gflags package contains a C++ library that implements commandline flags processing. It includes built-in support for standard types such as string and the ability to define flags in the source file in which they are used. Online documentation available at:
-
freebsd-src
The FreeBSD src tree publish-only repository. Experimenting with 'simple' pull requests....
-
InfluxDB
Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
-
-
Cobra (https://github.com/spf13/cobra), which is a pretty popular library for Go CLI applications, behaves more like classical GNU tools. It also offers usage/help autogeneration and autocompletion for popular shells.
Not sure about the relevant point on compact short options syntax as in `tar -xvzf archive.tgz` though...
I guess you could consider https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr.
I personally wouldn't touch that, but that's related to my allergies to JS ecosystem and predisposition to panic attacks when I see stuff like that https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr/blob/master/package-lock.....
Google's command line flags library, known to the public as absl::Flags and formerly gflags, does not distinguish between --foo and -foo, these are both the flag "foo". Each flag has a unique name so there is never a short -f equivalent to --foo, and -foo can never mean -f -o -o.
The main design motivation of absl::Flags is that the flag definitions can appear in any module, not just main. Go inherits this. A quirk that Go did not inherit is gflags --nofoo alternate form of --foo=false.
This is all documented at https://gflags.github.io/gflags/#commandline, which is pretty much a literal export of the flags package documentation that a Google engineer would see internally.
If anyone is looking for alternatives, try fd
I've switched to tealdeer: same database, rust implementation.
It's saying that because it's using getopt to parse any initial option arguments. That diagnostic message you see printed the standard default message printed out by the getopt function whenever encountering invalid option flag.
Judging by the usage message you printed, it's almost certainly the BSD implementation, probably macOS, which in turn probably syncs to the FreeBSD version. `find -name something` will failure early in main. See https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/b422540/usr.bin/... When processing the 'n' in '-name' getopt() will return '?', which will end up calling usage().
The GNU implementation of find is completely different, though I'm not sure it does what you expect:
$ find -name something
Were your expectations different?
Are there any good articles on the benefits of following such rules (any fungible improvements to legibility or usability, as opposed to just "consistency amongst different tools")?
Are there any tools which can validate whether any piece of software conforms to this standard (either by scanning the man pages, or the code, or a formalized format of parameters the app supports)? Personally, the closest i've found is Typer ( https://typer.tiangolo.com/ ) but without anything that can automatically reject non-conformant code as a part of a CI process, i think enforcing such formats would be a non-starter for me.
To be fair, there is one shell that I think someday we could rely on. https://www.nushell.sh/ Besides that, my answer is "any programming language," since at the core, dealing properly with system calls and their outputs is the whole reason PL's exist. In practice, I've been using Rust lately which makes a nice systems language, but JS and Python are always options for shell-like scripts that don't suffer from quite the level of degeneracy when encountering weird filenames or unexpected input in general.