5616
Comment:
|
8834
Remove Warn(), use plain echo
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 1: | Line 1: |
#pragma section-numbers 3 | |
Line 2: | Line 3: |
Line 3: | Line 5: |
Well, that depends a great deal on what you want to do with them. Here's a general template that might help for the simple cases: | Well, that depends a great deal on what you want to do with them. There are several approaches, each with its strengths and weaknesses. <<TableOfContents>> === Manual loop === This approach handles any arbitrary set of options, because you're writing the parser yourself. For 90% of programs, it may suffice. Here's an example that will handle a combination of short (`-v`, `-h`) and long (`--verbose`, `--help`) options; and also style `--verbose=LEVEL`. {{{#!highlight bash #!/bin/sh Main () { help="" # Reset all option variables that might be set later verbose="" verbose_level="" while : do case "$1" in -h | --help) help="help" shift # Remove from argument list # Now, e.g. call Help() function ;; --verbose=*) # If you want to support --option=VALUE style verbose="verbose" verbose_level=${1#*=} # Delete everything up till "=" shift ;; -v | --verbose) verbose="verbose" verbose_level=1 shift # Support "--verbose LEVEL" by reading next argument. case "$1" in [0-9]) verbose_level=$1 shift ;; esac ;; --) # End of all options shift break ;; -*) echo "WARN: Unknown option: $1" >&2 shift ;; *) # no more options. Stop while loop break ;; esac done # Suppose, some options are required. Check that we got them. # Make --verbose a required option: if [ ! "$verbose" ]; the echo "ERROR: option --verbose not given. See --help" >&2 return 1 fi # <Rest of the program here> } Main "$@" # End of file }}} What is ''not possible'' to do with pure shell approach, is to try to parse separate options concatenaed together. Like like `-xvf` which would understoos as `-x -v -f`. This could be possible with lot of effort, but in practise it wouldn't be worth it. You may be interested in knowing that some Bash programmers like to write this at the beginning of their scripts to guard against unused variables: |
Line 6: | Line 92: |
# Bash while [[ $1 == -* ]]; do case "$1" in -h|--help|-\?) show_help; exit 0;; -v|--verbose) verbose=1; shift;; -f) if (($# > 1)); then output_file=$2; shift 2 else printf "%s\n" "-f requires an argument" exit 1 fi ;; --) shift; break;; -*) echo "invalid option: $1"; show_help; exit 1;; |
set -u # or, set -o nounset }}} === getopts === '''Never use getopt(1).''' `getopt` cannot handle empty arguments strings, or arguments with embedded whitespace. Please forget that it ever existed. The POSIX shell (and others) offer `getopts` which is safe to use instead. Here is a simplistic `getopts` example: {{{#!highlight bash #!/bin/sh # A POSIX variable OPTIND=1 # Reset in case getopts has been used previously in the shell. while getopts "h?vf:" opt; do case "$opt" in h|\?) show_help exit 0 ;; v) verbose=1 ;; f) output_file=$OPTARG ;; |
Line 21: | Line 122: |
}}} Now all of the remaining arguments are the filenames which followed the optional switches. You can process those with `for i` or `"$@"`. A POSIX version of that same code: {{{ # POSIX while true; do case "$1" in -h|--help|-\?) show_help; exit 0;; -v|--verbose) verbose=1; shift;; -f) if [ $# -gt 1 ]; then output_file=$2; shift 2 else printf "%s\n" "-f requires an argument" exit 1 fi ;; --) shift; break;; -*) echo "invalid option: $1"; show_help; exit 1;; *) break;; |
shift $((OPTIND-1)) [ "$1" = "--" ] && shift echo "verbose=$verbose, output_file='$output_file', Leftovers: $@" # End of file }}} The disadvantage of `getopts` is that it can only handle short options (`-h`) without trickery. It handles `-vf filename` in the expected Unix way, automatically. `getopts` is a good candidate because it is portable and e.g. also works in dash. There is a [[http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/howto/getopts_tutorial|getopts tutorial]] which explains what all of the syntax and variables mean. In bash, there is also `help getopts`, which might be informative. There is also still the disadvantage that options are coded in at least 2, probably 3 places - in the call to `getopts`, in the case statement that processes them and presumably in the help message that you are going to get around to writing one of these days. This is a classic opportunity for errors to creep in as the code is written and maintained - often not discovered till much, much later. This can be avoided by using callback functions, but this approach kind of defeats the purpose of using getopts at all. Here is an example which parses long options with `getopts`. The basic idea is quite simple: just put "-:" into the optstring. This trick requires a shell which permits the option-argument (i.e. the filename in "-f filename") to be concatenated to the option (as in "-ffilename"). The [[http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/getopts.html|POSIX standard]] says there must be a space between them; bash and dash permit the "-ffilename" variant, but one should not rely on this leniency if attempting to write a portable script. {{{#!highlight bash #!/bin/bash # Uses bash extensions. Not portable as written. optspec=":h-:" while getopts "$optspec" optchar do case "${optchar}" in -) case "${OPTARG}" in loglevel) eval val="\$${OPTIND}"; OPTIND=$(( $OPTIND + 1 )) echo "Parsing option: '--${OPTARG}', value: '${val}'" >&2 ;; loglevel=*) val=${OPTARG#*=} opt=${OPTARG%=$val} echo "Parsing option: '--${opt}', value: '${val}'" >&2 ;; esac ;; h) echo "usage: $0 [--loglevel[=]<value>]" >&2 exit 2 ;; |
Line 44: | Line 191: |
For more complex/generalized cases, or if you want things like "-xvf" to be handled as three separate flags, or if you want to handle [[http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/libc/Argument-Syntax.html|GNU-style long options]], you need a different approach. '''Never use getopt(1).''' `getopt` cannot handle empty arguments strings, or arguments with embedded whitespace. Please forget that it ever existed. The POSIX shell (and others) offer `getopts` which is safe to use. Here is a simplistic `getopts` example: {{{ # POSIX x=1 # Avoids an error if we get no options at all. while getopts "abcf:g:h:" opt; do case "$opt" in a) echo "You said a";; b) echo "You said b";; c) echo "You said c";; f) echo "You said f, with argument $OPTARG";; g) echo "You said g, with argument $OPTARG";; h) echo "You said h, with argument $OPTARG";; esac x=$OPTIND done shift $(($x-1)) echo "Left overs: $@" }}} There is still the disadvantage that options are coded in at least 2, probably 3 places - in the call to `getopts`, in the case statement that processes them and presumably in the help message that you are going to get around to writing one of these days. This is a classic opportunity for errors to creep in as the code is written and maintained - often not discovered till much, much later. Another approach is to check options with `if` statements "on demand". A function like this one may be useful: {{{ # Bash HaveOpt() { local needle=$1 shift while [[ $1 == -* ]]; do case "$1" in --) return 1; # by convention, -- is end of options $needle) return 0;; esac |
=== Silly repeated brute-force scanning === Another approach is to check options with `if` statements "on demand". A function like this one may be useful: {{{#!highlight bash #!/bin/bash HaveOpt () { local needle=$1 |
Line 83: | Line 203: |
done return 1 |
while [[ $1 == -* ]] do # By convention, "--" means end of options. case "$1" in --) return 1 ;; $needle) return 0 ;; esac shift done return 1 |
Line 86: | Line 217: |
if HaveOpt --quick "$@"; then echo "Option quick is set"; fi }}} |
HaveOpt --quick "$@" && echo "Option quick is set" # End of file }}} |
Line 92: | Line 227: |
Line 96: | Line 232: |
Of course, this approach (iterating over the argument list every time you want to check for one) is far less efficient than just iterating once and setting flag variables. But it does offer a consolidation of the option-handling code into a single place (or two places if you count the help message). | Of course, this approach (iterating over the argument list every time you want to check for one) is far less efficient than just iterating once and setting flag variables. It also spreads the options throughout the program. The literal option `--quick` may appear a hundred lines down inside the main body of the program, nowhere near any other option name. This is a nightmare for maintenance. === Complex nonstandard add-on utilities === |
Line 106: | Line 252: |
source /usr/bin/process-getopt | source process-getopt |
Line 128: | Line 274: |
Here, all information about each option is defined in one place making for much easier authoring and maintenance. A lot of the dirty work is handled automatically and standards are obeyed as in getopt(1) - because it calls getopt for you. | Here, all information about each option is defined in one place making for much easier authoring and maintenance. A lot of the dirty work is handled automatically and standards are obeyed as in getopt(1) - because it calls getopt for you. |
Line 131: | Line 282: |
wooledg@wooledg:~/process-getopt-1.6$ set -- one 'rm -rf /' 'foo;bar' "'" wooledg@wooledg:~/process-getopt-1.6$ call_getopt "$@" |
~/process-getopt-1.6$ set -- one 'rm -rf /' 'foo;bar' "'" ~/process-getopt-1.6$ call_getopt "$@" |
Line 134: | Line 285: |
}}} . ''It appears to be intelligent enough to handle null options, whitespace-containing options, and single-quote-containing options in a manner that makes the [[BashFAQ/048|eval]] not blow up in your face. But this is not an endorsement of the process-getopt software overall; I don't know it well enough. -GreyCat . ''It's written and tested on Linux where the getopt(1) is very like `getopts`. In the interests of portability I'll see if `getopts` can be used and update this note when I have some results.'' |
}}} . ''It appears to be intelligent enough to handle null options, whitespace-containing options, and single-quote-containing options in a manner that makes the [[BashFAQ/048|eval]] not blow up in your face. But this is not an endorsement of the process-getopt software overall; I don't know it well enough. -GreyCat '' ''It's written and tested on Linux where getopt(1) supports long options. For portability, it tests the local getopt(1) at runtime and if it finds an non-GNU one (ie one that does not return 4 for {{{getopt --test}}}) it only processes short options. It does not use the bash builtin getopts(1) command. -[[http://bhepple.freeshell.org/oddmuse/wiki.cgi/process-getopt|bhepple]] '' ---- '' CategoryShell '' |
How can I handle command-line arguments (options) to my script easily?
Well, that depends a great deal on what you want to do with them. There are several approaches, each with its strengths and weaknesses.
Contents
Manual loop
This approach handles any arbitrary set of options, because you're writing the parser yourself. For 90% of programs, it may suffice.
Here's an example that will handle a combination of short (-v, -h) and long (--verbose, --help) options; and also style --verbose=LEVEL.
1 #!/bin/sh
2
3 Main ()
4 {
5 help="" # Reset all option variables that might be set later
6 verbose=""
7 verbose_level=""
8
9 while :
10 do
11 case "$1" in
12 -h | --help)
13 help="help"
14 shift # Remove from argument list
15 # Now, e.g. call Help() function
16 ;;
17 --verbose=*)
18 # If you want to support --option=VALUE style
19 verbose="verbose"
20 verbose_level=${1#*=} # Delete everything up till "="
21 shift
22 ;;
23 -v | --verbose)
24 verbose="verbose"
25 verbose_level=1
26 shift
27
28 # Support "--verbose LEVEL" by reading next argument.
29
30 case "$1" in
31 [0-9]) verbose_level=$1
32 shift
33 ;;
34 esac
35 ;;
36 --) # End of all options
37 shift
38 break
39 ;;
40 -*)
41 echo "WARN: Unknown option: $1" >&2
42 shift
43 ;;
44 *) # no more options. Stop while loop
45 break
46 ;;
47 esac
48 done
49
50 # Suppose, some options are required. Check that we got them.
51 # Make --verbose a required option:
52
53 if [ ! "$verbose" ]; the
54 echo "ERROR: option --verbose not given. See --help" >&2
55 return 1
56 fi
57
58 # <Rest of the program here>
59 }
60
61 Main "$@"
62
63 # End of file
What is not possible to do with pure shell approach, is to try to parse separate options concatenaed together. Like like -xvf which would understoos as -x -v -f. This could be possible with lot of effort, but in practise it wouldn't be worth it.
You may be interested in knowing that some Bash programmers like to write this at the beginning of their scripts to guard against unused variables:
set -u # or, set -o nounset
getopts
Never use getopt(1). getopt cannot handle empty arguments strings, or arguments with embedded whitespace. Please forget that it ever existed.
The POSIX shell (and others) offer getopts which is safe to use instead. Here is a simplistic getopts example:
1 #!/bin/sh
2
3 # A POSIX variable
4 OPTIND=1 # Reset in case getopts has been used previously in the shell.
5
6 while getopts "h?vf:" opt; do
7 case "$opt" in
8 h|\?)
9 show_help
10 exit 0
11 ;;
12 v) verbose=1
13 ;;
14 f) output_file=$OPTARG
15 ;;
16 esac
17 done
18
19 shift $((OPTIND-1))
20
21 [ "$1" = "--" ] && shift
22
23 echo "verbose=$verbose, output_file='$output_file', Leftovers: $@"
24
25 # End of file
The disadvantage of getopts is that it can only handle short options (-h) without trickery. It handles -vf filename in the expected Unix way, automatically. getopts is a good candidate because it is portable and e.g. also works in dash.
There is a [[http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/howto/getopts_tutorial|getopts tutorial]] which explains what all of the syntax and variables mean. In bash, there is also help getopts, which might be informative.
There is also still the disadvantage that options are coded in at least 2, probably 3 places - in the call to getopts, in the case statement that processes them and presumably in the help message that you are going to get around to writing one of these days. This is a classic opportunity for errors to creep in as the code is written and maintained - often not discovered till much, much later. This can be avoided by using callback functions, but this approach kind of defeats the purpose of using getopts at all.
Here is an example which parses long options with getopts. The basic idea is quite simple: just put "-:" into the optstring. This trick requires a shell which permits the option-argument (i.e. the filename in "-f filename") to be concatenated to the option (as in "-ffilename"). The [[http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/getopts.html|POSIX standard]] says there must be a space between them; bash and dash permit the "-ffilename" variant, but one should not rely on this leniency if attempting to write a portable script.
1 #!/bin/bash
2 # Uses bash extensions. Not portable as written.
3
4 optspec=":h-:"
5
6 while getopts "$optspec" optchar
7 do
8 case "${optchar}" in
9 -)
10 case "${OPTARG}" in
11 loglevel)
12 eval val="\$${OPTIND}"; OPTIND=$(( $OPTIND + 1 ))
13 echo "Parsing option: '--${OPTARG}', value: '${val}'" >&2
14 ;;
15 loglevel=*)
16 val=${OPTARG#*=}
17 opt=${OPTARG%=$val}
18 echo "Parsing option: '--${opt}', value: '${val}'" >&2
19 ;;
20 esac
21 ;;
22 h)
23 echo "usage: $0 [--loglevel[=]<value>]" >&2
24 exit 2
25 ;;
26 esac
27 done
Silly repeated brute-force scanning
Another approach is to check options with if statements "on demand". A function like this one may be useful:
1 #!/bin/bash
2
3 HaveOpt ()
4 {
5 local needle=$1
6 shift
7
8 while [[ $1 == -* ]]
9 do
10 # By convention, "--" means end of options.
11 case "$1" in
12 --) return 1 ;;
13 $needle) return 0 ;;
14 esac
15
16 shift
17 done
18
19 return 1
20 }
21
22 HaveOpt --quick "$@" && echo "Option quick is set"
23
24 # End of file
and it will work if script is run as:
- YES: ./script --quick
- YES: ./script -other --quick
but will stop on first argument with no "-" in front (or on --):
- NO: ./script -bar foo --quick
- NO: ./script -bar -- --quick
Of course, this approach (iterating over the argument list every time you want to check for one) is far less efficient than just iterating once and setting flag variables.
It also spreads the options throughout the program. The literal option --quick may appear a hundred lines down inside the main body of the program, nowhere near any other option name. This is a nightmare for maintenance.
Complex nonstandard add-on utilities
bhepple suggests the use of process-getopt (GPL licensed) and offers this example code:
PROG=$(basename $0) VERSION='1.2' USAGE="A tiny example using process-getopt(1)" # call process-getopt functions to define some options: source process-getopt SLOT="" SLOT_func() { [ "${1:-""}" ] && SLOT="yes"; } # callback for SLOT option add_opt SLOT "boolean option" s "" slot TOKEN="" TOKEN_func() { [ "${1:-""}" ] && TOKEN="$2"; } # callback for TOKEN option add_opt TOKEN "this option takes a value" t n token number add_std_opts # define the standard options --help etc: TEMP=$(call_getopt "$@") || exit 1 eval set -- "$TEMP" # just as with getopt(1) # remove the options from the command line process_opts "$@" || shift "$?" echo "SLOT=$SLOT" echo "TOKEN=$TOKEN" echo "args=$@"
Here, all information about each option is defined in one place making for much easier authoring and maintenance. A lot of the dirty work is handled automatically and standards are obeyed as in getopt(1) - because it calls getopt for you.
Actually, what the author forgot to say was that it's actually using getopts semantics, rather than getopt. I ran this test:
~/process-getopt-1.6$ set -- one 'rm -rf /' 'foo;bar' "'" ~/process-getopt-1.6$ call_getopt "$@" -- 'rm -rf /' 'foo;bar' ''\'''
It appears to be intelligent enough to handle null options, whitespace-containing options, and single-quote-containing options in a manner that makes the eval not blow up in your face. But this is not an endorsement of the process-getopt software overall; I don't know it well enough. -GreyCat
It's written and tested on Linux where getopt(1) supports long options. For portability, it tests the local getopt(1) at runtime and if it finds an non-GNU one (ie one that does not return 4 for getopt --test) it only processes short options. It does not use the bash builtin getopts(1) command. -bhepple