Merge branch 'master' into basic-enum

Henry Fredrick Schreiner
2 parents f7cf8905 21559bd1
Showing 9 changed files with 112 additions and 17 deletions
CHANGELOG.md
README.md
examples/CMakeLists.txt
examples/try2.cpp → examples/groups.cpp
examples/inter_argument_order.cpp
examples/try.cpp → examples/simple.cpp
examples/try1.cpp → examples/subcommands.cpp
include/CLI/App.hpp
tests/AppTest.cpp
 ## Version 1.1 (in progress)
 * Added support for basic enumerations [#12](https://github.com/CLIUtils/CLI11/issues/12)
+* Added `app.parse_order()` with original parse order
 ## Version 1.0
 * Cleanup using `clang-tidy` and `clang-format`
@@ -31,15 +31,25 @@ An acceptable CLI parser library should be all of the following:
 * Work with standard types, simple custom types, and extendible to exotic types.
 * Permissively licenced.
-The major CLI parsers for C++ include:
-
-* [Boost Program Options]: A great library if you already depend on Boost, but its pre-C++11 syntax is really odd and setting up the correct call in the main function is poorly documented (and is nearly a page of code). A simple wrapper for the Boost library was originally developed, but was discarded as CLI11 became more powerful. The idea of capturing a value and setting it originated with Boost PO.
-* [The Lean Mean C++ Option Parser]: One header file is great, but the syntax is atrocious, in my opinion. It was quite impractical to wrap the syntax or to use in a complex project. It seems to handle standard parsing quite well.
-* [TCLAP]: The not-quite-standard command line parsing causes common shortcuts to fail. It also seems to be poorly supported, with only minimal bugfixes accepted. Header only, but in quite a few files. Has not managed to get enough support to move to GitHub yet. No subcommands. Produces wrapped values.
-* [Cxxopts]: C++11, single file, and nice CMake support, but requires regex, therefore GCC 4.8 (CentOS 7 default) does not work. Syntax closely based on Boost PO, so not ideal but familiar.
-* [DocOpt]: Completely different approach to program options in C++11, you write the docs and the interface is generated. Too fragile and specialized.
-* [GFlags]: The Google Commandline Flags library. Uses macros heavily, and is limited in scope, missing things like subcommands. It provides a simple syntax and supports config files/env vars.
-* [GetOpt]: Very limited C solution with long, convoluted syntax. Does not support much of anything, like help generation. Always available on UNIX, though (but in different flavors).
+The major CLI parsers for C++ include (with my biased opinions):
+
+| Library | My biased opinion |
+|---------|-------------------|
+| [Boost Program Options] | A great library if you already depend on Boost, but its pre-C++11 syntax is really odd and setting up the correct call in the main function is poorly documented (and is nearly a page of code). A simple wrapper for the Boost library was originally developed, but was discarded as CLI11 became more powerful. The idea of capturing a value and setting it originated with Boost PO. |
+| [The Lean Mean C++ Option Parser] | One header file is great, but the syntax is atrocious, in my opinion. It was quite impractical to wrap the syntax or to use in a complex project. It seems to handle standard parsing quite well. |
+| [TCLAP] | The not-quite-standard command line parsing causes common shortcuts to fail. It also seems to be poorly supported, with only minimal bugfixes accepted. Header only, but in quite a few files. Has not managed to get enough support to move to GitHub yet. No subcommands. Produces wrapped values. |
+| [Cxxopts] | C++11, single file, and nice CMake support, but requires regex, therefore GCC 4.8 (CentOS 7 default) does not work. Syntax closely based on Boost PO, so not ideal but familiar. |
+| [DocOpt] | Completely different approach to program options in C++11, you write the docs and the interface is generated. Too fragile and specialized. |
+
+After I wrote this, I also found the following libraries:
+
+| Library | My biased opinion |
+|---------|-------------------|
+| [GFlags] | The Google Commandline Flags library. Uses macros heavily, and is limited in scope, missing things like subcommands. It provides a simple syntax and supports config files/env vars. |
+| [GetOpt] | Very limited C solution with long, convoluted syntax. Does not support much of anything, like help generation. Always available on UNIX, though (but in different flavors). |
+| [ProgramOptions.hxx] | Intresting library, less powerful and no subcommands. |
+| [Args] | Also interesting, and supports subcommands. I like the optional-like design, but CLI11 is cleaner and provides direct value access, and is less verbose. |
+| [Argument Aggregator] | I'm a big fan of the [fmt] library, and the try-catch statement looks familiar.  :thumbsup: Doesn't seem to support subcommands. |
 None of these libraries fulfill all the above requirements. As you probably have already guessed, CLI11 does.
 So, this library was designed to provide a great syntax, good compiler compatibility, and minimal installation fuss.
@@ -154,7 +164,7 @@ On the command line, options can be given as:
 * `--file=filename` (equals)
 Extra positional arguments will cause the program to exit, so at least one positional option with a vector is recommended if you want to allow extraneous arguments.
-If you set `.allow_extras()` on the main `App`, the parse function will return the left over arguments instead of throwing an error.
+If you set `.allow_extras()` on the main `App`, the parse function will return the left over arguments instead of throwing an error. You can access a vector of pointers to the parsed options in the original order using `parse_order()`.
 If `--` is present in the command line,
 everything after that is positional only.
@@ -306,4 +316,8 @@ CLI11 was developed at the [University of Cincinnati] to support of the [GooFit]
 [DIANA/HEP]:         http://diana-hep.org
 [NSF Award 1414736]: https://nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1414736
 [University of Cincinnati]: http://www.uc.edu
-[GitBook]:           https://henryiii.gitbooks.io/cli11/content
+[GitBook]:             https://henryiii.gitbooks.io/cli11/content
+[ProgramOptions.hxx]:  https://github.com/Fytch/ProgramOptions.hxx
+[Argument Aggregator]: https://github.com/vietjtnguyen/argagg
+[Args]:                https://github.com/Taywee/args
+[fmt]:                 https://github.com/fmtlib/fmt
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ function(add_cli_exe T)
     endif()
 endfunction()
-add_cli_exe(try try.cpp)
-add_cli_exe(try1 try1.cpp)
-add_cli_exe(try2 try2.cpp)
+add_cli_exe(simple simple.cpp)
+add_cli_exe(subcommands subcommands.cpp)
+add_cli_exe(groups groups.cpp)
+add_cli_exe(inter_argument_order inter_argument_order.cpp)
+#include <CLI/CLI.hpp>
+#include <iostream>
+#include <vector>
+#include <tuple>
+
+int main(int argc, char **argv) {
+    CLI::App app;
+
+    std::vector<int> foos;
+    auto foo = app.add_option("--foo,-f", foos);
+
+    std::vector<int> bars;
+    auto bar = app.add_option("--bar", bars);
+
+    app.add_flag("--z,--x"); // Random other flags
+
+    // Standard parsing lines (copy and paste in)
+    try {
+        app.parse(argc, argv);
+    } catch(const CLI::ParseError &e) {
+        return app.exit(e);
+    }
+
+    // I perfer using the back and popping
+    std::reverse(std::begin(foos), std::end(foos));
+    std::reverse(std::begin(bars), std::end(bars));
+
+    std::vector<std::tuple<std::string, int>> keyval;
+    for(auto option : app.parse_order()) {
+        if(option == foo) {
+            keyval.emplace_back("foo", foos.back());
+            foos.pop_back();
+        }
+        if(option == bar) {
+            keyval.emplace_back("bar", bars.back());
+            bars.pop_back();
+        }
+    }
+
+    // Prove the vector is correct
+    std::string name;
+    int value;
+
+    for(auto &tuple : keyval) {
+        std::tie(name, value) = tuple;
+        std::cout << name << " : " << value << std::endl;
+    }
+}
@@ -81,6 +81,9 @@ class App {
     /// This is faster and cleaner than storing just a list of strings and reparsing. This may contain the -- separator.
     missing_t missing_;
+    /// This is a list of pointers to options with the orignal parse order
+    std::vector<Option *> parse_order_;
+
     ///@}
     /// @name Subcommands
     ///@{
@@ -291,7 +294,7 @@ class App {
                 variable.emplace_back();
                 retval &= detail::lexical_cast(a, variable.back());
             }
-            return variable.size() > 0 && retval;
+            return (!variable.empty()) && retval;
         };
         Option *opt = add_option(name, fun, description, defaulted);
@@ -805,6 +808,9 @@ class App {
         return local_name == name_to_check;
     }
+    /// This gets a vector of pointers with the original parse order
+    const std::vector<Option *> &parse_order() const { return parse_order_; }
+
     ///@}
   protected:
@@ -1043,6 +1049,7 @@ class App {
                (static_cast<int>(opt->count()) < opt->get_expected() || opt->get_expected() < 0)) {
                 opt->add_result(positional);
+                parse_order_.push_back(opt.get());
                 args.pop_back();
                 return;
             }
@@ -1105,18 +1112,21 @@ class App {
         int num = op->get_expected();
-        if(num == 0)
+        if(num == 0) {
             op->add_result("");
-        else if(rest != "") {
+            parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
+        } else if(rest != "") {
             if(num > 0)
                 num--;
             op->add_result(rest);
+            parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
             rest = "";
         }
         if(num == -1) {
             while(!args.empty() && _recognize(args.back()) == detail::Classifer::NONE) {
                 op->add_result(args.back());
+                parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
                 args.pop_back();
             }
         } else
@@ -1125,6 +1135,7 @@ class App {
                 std::string current_ = args.back();
                 args.pop_back();
                 op->add_result(current_);
+                parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
             }
         if(rest != "") {
@@ -1169,19 +1180,23 @@ class App {
             if(num != -1)
                 num--;
             op->add_result(value);
+            parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
         } else if(num == 0) {
             op->add_result("");
+            parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
         }
         if(num == -1) {
             while(!args.empty() && _recognize(args.back()) == detail::Classifer::NONE) {
                 op->add_result(args.back());
+                parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
                 args.pop_back();
             }
         } else
             while(num > 0 && !args.empty()) {
                 num--;
                 op->add_result(args.back());
+                parse_order_.push_back(op.get());
                 args.pop_back();
             }
         return;
@@ -530,6 +530,22 @@ TEST_F(TApp, VectorFancyOpts) {
     EXPECT_THROW(run(), CLI::ParseError);
 }
+TEST_F(TApp, OriginalOrder) {
+    std::vector<int> st1;
+    CLI::Option *op1 = app.add_option("-a", st1);
+    std::vector<int> st2;
+    CLI::Option *op2 = app.add_option("-b", st2);
+
+    args = {"-a", "1", "-b", "2", "-a3", "-a", "4"};
+
+    run();
+
+    EXPECT_EQ(st1, std::vector<int>({1, 3, 4}));
+    EXPECT_EQ(st2, std::vector<int>({2}));
+
+    EXPECT_EQ(app.parse_order(), std::vector<CLI::Option *>({op1, op2, op1, op1}));
+}
+
 TEST_F(TApp, RequiresFlags) {
     CLI::Option *opt = app.add_flag("-s,--string");
     app.add_flag("--both")->requires(opt);