Re: Local Versus Global Command Options

On 2/17/2025 4:49 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 12:02:37 -0700, Mark Berryman wrote:

On 2/16/25 5:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

Consider what happens: if you pass unquoted text to program X, DCL
converts it to uppercase, and I think also normalizes multiple spaces
to a single space. If you don’t want the text to be uppercased or
space- normalized, you put it in pairs of double quotes. But then these
double quotes also get passed as part of the command line. So the
receiving program has to do some non-trivial parsing just to get simple
literal text via the command line.

>
So, so, so very wrong.  You are *way* behind the times.
>
I *never* have to quote arguments when using programs that still use
*nix syntax on VMS.  My arguments' case is never changed.

 Prove it. It seems to me what you are claiming would break backward
compatibility with the way VMS used to work.
 

Here is the entry point to any C program on VMS:
>
   int main (int argc, char *argv[], char *envp[]);
>
See?  Argument passing works the same on VMS as it does on *nix, as
described above.
>
Let's see, what's a good example?  Ah, here's one:
>
$ gs -q -P- -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -sstdout=%stderr
-sOutputFile=<something>.pdf <something>.ps
>
Again, see?  No quoting.  No case conversion.  Ghostscript sees the
command exactly as I typed it and I typed it exactly as I would on a
*nix system.

 Can you show us a simple C program that just prints out its command
arguments, and how it responds to some sample command lines?

Why would we do that?
Last time you came with those claims I posted (23-May-2024)
a rather extensive demo with CLI, foreign command, hybrid, C
and DCL with both /parse=ext and /parse=trad.
Apparently you did not read it. Which is fine, but don't expect
anybody to redo the work when you did not read it the first time.
Arne