From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jan 1 19:55:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA03203 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 19:55:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from phoenix.its.rpi.edu (dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu [128.113.161.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03158 for ; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 19:54:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu) Received: from localhost (dec@localhost) by phoenix.its.rpi.edu (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA21905; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 22:54:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 22:54:47 -0500 (EST) From: "David E. Cross" To: Niall Smart cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: getopt(3) and numeric arguments In-Reply-To: <19980101231313.1118.qmail@ginseng.indigo.ie> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Niall Smart wrote: > Hi, > > The getopt(3) man page says: > > It is also possible to handle digits as option letters. This allows > getopt() to be used with programs that expect a number (``-3'') as an op- > tion. This practice is wrong, and should not be used in any current de- > velopment. It is provided for backward compatibility only. > > Is this correct? Whats so bad about it? Mostly for sake of clarity... is -3 'negative 3' or 'option 3'. I still get confused with nice... is 'nice -20' going oto run at nice level 20, or nice level -20? -- David Cross ACS Consultant