New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support long options with object properties #924
Comments
This adds initial support for long options. This integration tests them with `shell.touch()` and unit tests them in `test/common.js`. This also refactors some of the common internals: * Creates a new CommandError type to replace the `'earlyExit'` hack * Clearer Error types for `parseOptions()` exceptions * Removes side effects from a test which modifies `common.config` * Fixes appveyor and travis config to run lint (regressed in #920) Issue #924 Test: touch.js, common.js
This adds initial support for long options. This integration tests them with `shell.touch()` and unit tests them in `test/common.js`. This documents the new syntax. This also refactors some of the common internals: * Creates a new CommandError type to replace the `'earlyExit'` hack * Clearer Error types for `parseOptions()` exceptions * Removes side effects from a test which modifies `common.config` * Fixes appveyor and travis config to run lint (regressed in #920) Issue #924 Test: touch.js, common.js
* feat(options): initial support for long options This adds initial support for long options. This integration tests them with `shell.touch()` and unit tests them in `test/common.js`. This documents the new syntax. This also refactors some of the common internals: * Creates a new CommandError type to replace the `'earlyExit'` hack * Clearer Error types for `parseOptions()` exceptions * Removes side effects from a test which modifies `common.config` * Fixes appveyor and travis config to run lint (regressed in #920) Issue #924 Test: touch.js, common.js * small refactor for errorOptions
👍 to this one. How is the progress, can I help? |
@Deadarius thanks for taking a look at this! Sorry for the delay, I've been quite busy lately. I think #926 landed the initial framework. The next step is to go through existing commands and write tests to verify the existing long-options work (ex. After that, we need to double-check we're using the right names for existing long-options (ex. |
#926 is a good starting point—look at the changes to |
Inspired by #923. It would be cool to support "long options" by using Object property names.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: