Re: [Groff] Re: getopt() as gtroff macro ?

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Would the .getopt request not need to also include the arguments of the 
> invoking macro?  Thus, this example would become:
> 
>   .de foo
>   .  getopt "foox" "ac:" "--all --check=" \\$@
>   .  ...
>   ..

Yes, I forgot that.

> > It probably makes sense to provide a .gnu-getopt request also to
> > reorder the arguments.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the need for this, unless you mean to
> support intermixing of option and regular arguments, in any order --
> but could a simple .getopt request not provide this capability in
> any case?  Perhaps a register, say \n[getopt-strict], could be used
> to select between strict and flexible ordering, if a need for this
> is perceived.

I favor to have two different request names instead of a request and a
register which controls it.  Assuming that we have the .local request,
shall your proposed \n[getopt-strict] become local also?


    Werner