[GRASS-dev] RFC: Module Option Parser

[Florian Kindl]

On Dec 22 [ 9:36], Markus Neteler wrote:
> Glynn Clements wrote on 12/21/2006 06:50 PM:
> > Brad Douglas wrote:
> >
> >   
> >>> If most of the options only apply to a specific "mode", that suggests
> >>> that each mode should be implemented as a separate module. If they
> >>> share common code, make it a library.
> >>>       
> >> I disagree.  Currently there are about 150 raster and 65 vector modules.
> >> The list is not shrinking and becoming a bit unwieldy.
> >>     
> >
> > I don't see a problem with having a large number of modules.
> >
> >   
> >From a user's perspective this can become very confusing.
> I tried to introduce the "keywords" concept to make the user easier
> navigate through the available algorithms, but didn't get much
> feedback on this.
> 
> 
> ls -l $HOME/grass63/dist.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin | wc -l
> 321
> 
> plus scripts is already too much in my opinion.
> 

The pain is eased by the hierarchical naming conventions, i.e. r.*, 
r.li.*, v.net.* and so on. However, it is paramount to adhere to those
naming conventions. If the modules do have descriptive names arranged in a
meaningful hierarchy it's not all that hard to find what you're looking
for.

my 2 euro-cent,
\flo.


-- 
Florian Kindl
Institute of Geography
University of Innsbruck
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20061222/ccfb5523/attachment.bin