It is traditional for programs that take command-line options in one of the following ways:
my-program optionname=option my-program --optionname option my-program --optionname=option my-program /optionname option
R3-Alpha's %make-make.r had code for the first case, so you would say
make-make OS_ID=1.2.3, or whatever. This was presumably just going with the flow of how options to GNU make were specified.
@giuliolunati had an interesting idea of using a more Rebol-like syntax:
my-program optionname: option
This not only is "more Rebolish", but you get filename completion on your options in most shells (because it's not trying to do the completion with
optionname= glued to the front of it).
At the moment, you can use either
optionname: with %make.r. I've been using the colon form for a while, and like it. For the sake of simplicity, I'm wondering if it should be the only option format that
I can't think of any technical reason not to do it. One could argue that it will look unfamiliar. But I think it's easier to read this way.
Is there any reason not to standardize to this?