[Scummvm-devel] Re: [Scummvm-devel] Command line options - please comment

Pawel Kolodziejski pablo at omega.xtr.net.pl
Fri Oct 10 08:57:08 CEST 2003

> Yo folks,
> I reviewed our command line options, and how we are handling them
> currently. I'd like to propose some changes, please tell me what you
> think about it:
> 1) Let's add long alternatives for (almost?) all options. I want to be
> able to do "scummvm --version" or "scummvm --path=/my/path --gfx=hq3x
> monkey2" and similar.

I agree

> With the current way we handle options, this would be rather cumbersome
> to add, but I have some ideas how we can reorganize the code to make
> this easy, with about as much code as we use now. So no code
> duplication, and no evil goto tricks.

I don't know nothing about this part of code....
Not duplicated and clean code is always good :)

> 2) Some IMHO rather obscure options currently have a single-letter
> options assigned. For example, consider the "-t<NUM>" option which
> probably is rarely used. Anybody who needs could still use it via
> "--tempo=NUM".

I agree too, short params only for frequently use and for debugger params.

> All of  -y, -t, -c, -j all are candidates for this. They are (in my
> experience, which might differ from yours, which is why I ask for
> comments!) are seldom used, and anybody who needs them always would
> probably put them into the config file anyway.

I prefer use default params from config. Under windows in msvc i prefer
some short params to put in debugger params. btw i don't remember if i use
this params before or it's my memory fault :)

> 3) Point 2 will make room in the ranks of single-letter options for
> other more useful options. For example, "-t" could stand for "List
> (T)argets" (this is just an example, we don't have to do it, or we can
> use another letter :-)
Yes good idea. 't' as target...., ....

> 4) I'd like to remove the "-l" and "-w" options completely (they are
> currently disabled in CVS anyway, but I could reimplement them with the
> new config manager should we decide on keeping them). The fact that
> when I asked on IRC who used them, the replies all were of the kind
> "hu? what do -l and -w do?" confirms my theory that they are extremely

"hu? what do -l and -w do?" :D

> rarely used, and in fact I doubt their usefulness at all. Yes, I can of
> course construct hypothetical scenarios were they are useful. But can
> anybody come up with a realistic scenario, were there are no easy
> alternatives?
> The only argument I heard for keeping it was that erik doesn't like
> getting his config file rewritten (in particular loosing his comments).
> But here the proper solution IMHO is to change the code so that it can
> retains comments.
> Again, please comment.
> Cheers,
> Max

More information about the Scummvm-devel mailing list