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

[Keith Marshall]

On Friday 24 September 2004 3:43 pm, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > 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?

It would probably make more sense for it to be global, but I now see the 
logic behind your preference for two requests, and am inclined to agree.

BTW, did I correctly interpret your original reasoning for providing two 
requests?  You didn't actually confirm this.

Best regards,
Keith.