Previously the Arg id was set with the "name" attribute. This allows use
of an "id" attribute to match the underlying struct.
A side effect of this is that the "id" attribute may also be used on
Commands. This isn't desired, but given the current architecture of the
attribute parser, it's hard to avoid.
Fixes: #3785
Naming is hard. I found I was writing new code without the `s` so that
suggests the name was wrong. But we renamed `number_of_values` to
`num_args`, so should this be `ArgRange`?
TakesValue helps because it provides a way for a lot of settings to say
a value is needed without specifying how many. Multiple values didn't
have enough call sites to make this worthwhile.
This is a part of #2688
multiple_values is now just book keeping for the builder, instead people
should look to actions and `num_args`.
The meaning for it was a little weird anyways.
The only time it won't be initialized is before `_build`. This is possible because
of #4027
I wish I could just put the `expect` inside the call but I'm worried
about allowing people to build stuff on top of clap.
As we move people off takes_value/multiple_values, this will provide
something to check.
This was previously blocked on other issues related to flag handling
(#4023)
In clap v3, `require_value_delimiter` activated an alternative parse
mode where
- `multiple_values` meant "multiple values within a single arg"
- `number_of_values` having no parse impact, only validation impact
- `value_names` being delimited values
For unbounded `number_of_values`, this is exactly what `value_delimiter`
provides. The only value is if someone wanted `value_name` to be
`<file1>,<file2>,...` which can be useful and we might look into adding
back in.
Alternatively, this could be used for cases like key-value pairs but
that has issues like not allowing the delimiter in the value which might
be ok in some cases but not others. We already instead document that
people should instead use `ValueParser` for this case.
In removing this, we remove points of confusion at how the different
multiple values and delimited value calls interact with each other. I
know I would set `require_value_delimiter(true).multiple_values(true)`
when it turns out all I needed was `value_delimiter(',')`.
This also reduces the API surface area which makes it easier to discover
what features we do provide.
While this isn't big, this is also yet another small step towards
reducing binary size and compile times.
This will allow `num_args(0..=1).value_delimiter(',')` to work properly.
This hacks in support for `require_value_delimiter` until we can remove
it.
This no longer recognzes value terminators in delimited lists.
It looks like there is a bug with recognizing value terminators in
positionals arguments. We'll need to dig into that more.
This reduces ambiguity in how the different "multiple" parts of the API
interact and lowrs the amount of API surface area users have to dig
through to use clap.
For now, this is only a matter of cleaning up the public API. Cleaning
up the implementation is the next step.
When suggesting required arguments, we wanted to avoid an argument
showing up in both a group and by itself but we didn't correctly
calculate that, causing no required arguments to show up at times.
Now, we all use the same pool of information for doing the calculations.
This was the type of cleanup that I expected it to drop our binary size
but this added 1k to our .text. Strange.
Fixes#4004
In the short term, this just provides a back door to custom actions.
Longer term, we can explore a `SetConst` action that relies on this
behavior. Really, `SetTrue` and `SetFalse` are shortcuts for such an
action but shortcuts can be helpful for usability.
Apparently, this also reduced `.text` size by 1k
Rendering of usage is not in a critical path, so should be more worried
about binary size than performance. That only leaves avoiding coloring
spaces. That shouldn't be a problem, so let's make the binary smaller.
With `number_of_values` being per-occurrence now, its doesn't make sense
for `number_of_values(0)` to set `takes_value(true)` or for
`number_of_values(1)` to set `multiple_values(true)`.
In addition, an assert is made if the user works around this
This both simplifies the code and the model we present to the user,
making more sense.
There is room for further exploration of tying flag actions into this.
This changes the default type as well to encourage preserving the full
information for shelling out. If people need UTF-8, then they can
change the value parser.
Fixes#3733
When checking into binary size, I noticed that the `git` example is a
lot larger than v3. `git bisect` narrowed it down to
11076a5c70 which doesn't make sense. I
did noticed we could remove some bloat from monomorphization.
Overall for `cargo-example, we've dropped about 47 KiB.
Previous behavior:
- They'd be sorted by default
- They'd derive display order if `DeriveDisplayOrder` was set
- This could be set recursively
- The initial display order value for subcommands was 0
New behavior:
- Sorted order is derived by default
- Sorting is turned on by `cmd.next_display_order(None)`
- This is not recursive, it must be set on each level
- The display order incrementing is mixed with arguments
- This does make it slightly more difficult to predict
We had some tests for this but not sufficient obviously. The problem is
we were tweaking the positional argument counter when processing flags
and not just positional arguments. Delaying it until after flags seems
to fix this.
Fixes#3959
A couple of things happened when preparing to release 3.0
- We needed derive documentation
- I had liked how serde handled theres
- I had bad experiences finding things in structopt's documentation
- The examples were broken and we needed tests
- The examples seemed to follow a pattern of having tutorial content and
cookbook content
- We had been getting bug reports from people looking at master and
thinking they were looking at what is currently released
- We had gotten feedback to keep down the number of places that
documentation was located
From this, we went with a mix of docs.rs and github
- We kept the number of content locations at 2 rather than 3 by not
having an external site like serde
- We rewrote the examples into explicit tutorials and cookbooks to align
with the 4 styles of documentation
- We could test our examples by running `console` code blocks with
trycmd
- Documentation was versioned and the README pointed to the last release
This had downsides
- The tutorials didn't have the code inlined
- Users still had a hard time finding and navigating between the
different forms of documentation
- In practice, we were less likely to cross-link between the different
types of documentation
Moving to docs.rs would offer a lot of benefits, even if it is only
designed for Rust-reference documentation and isn't good for Rust derive
reference documentation, tutorials, cookbooks, etc. The big problem was
keeping the examples tested to keep maintenance costs down. Maybe its
just me but its easy to overlook
- You can pull documentation from a file using `#[doc = "path"]`
- Repeated doc attributes get concatenated rather than first or last
writer winning
Remember these when specifically thinking about Rust documentation made
me realize that we could get everything into docs.rs.
When doing this
- Tutorial code got brought in as was one of the aims
- We needed to split the lib documentation and the README to have all of
the linking work. This allowed us to specialize them according to
their rule (user vs contributor)
- We needed to avoid users getting caught up in making a decision
between Derive and Builder APIs so we put the focus on the derive API
with links to the FAQ to help users decide when to use one or the
other.
- Improved cross-referencing between different parts of the
documentation
- Limited inline comments were added to example code
- Introductory example code intentionally does not have teaching
comments in it as its meant to give a flavor or sense of things and
not meant to teach on its own.
This is a first attempt. There will be a lot of room for further
improvement. Current know downsides:
- Content source is more split up for the tutorials
This hopefully addresses #3189
This fixes a bug introduced in 4a694f3592
when we were trying to move away from presence checks via occurrences.
I switched it to the common type of presence check but really what we
want is a highest-precedence check.
Fixes#3872
When upgrading our company projects from clap 3.1 to clap 3.2 I had
to fix several references to `clap::lazy_init`. People are not
supposed to do that, but that's hard to enforce.
Hope placing `once_cell` reexport into `__macro_refs` prevent at
least some of the such issues in the future.
Before, I was mixed on doing this as ideally people would upgrade
through the minor releases, going through the release notes. This also
saves us havin to audit deprecations to make sure they are all pointing
to the latest.
First, this isn't practical for users. Its annoying to pin your version (at least
its easier now that we pin `clap_derive` for users) and a lot of work to
go through them one step at a time.
On top of that, we've changed our deprecation policy to put the timing
of responding to deprecations into the user's hands with, with us
putting them behind the `deprecated` feature flag. This means someone
might respond to deprecations every once in a while or might not do it
until right before the 4.0 release. Our deprecation messages should be
updated to respond to that.
This supersedes #3616
This broke when we introduced clap_lex and then did a refactor on top.
We put in guards to say that escapes shouldn't happen but missed `--=`
which isn't quite an escape.
Not fully set on what error should be returned in this case (we are
returning roughly what we used to) but at least
we aren't panicing.
Fixes#3858
Between
- `ArgAction::SetTrue` storing actual values
- `ArgAction::Set` making it easier for derive users to override bool
behavior
- `Arg::default_missing_value` allowing hybrid-flags
- This commit documenting hybrid-flags even further
There shouldn't be anything left for #1649Fixes#1649
This adds a new `Cargo.toml` feature named `deprecated` that opts
controls whether deprecation warnings show up. This is starting off as
non-default though that may change (see below).
Benefits
- Allows a staged rollout so a smaller subset of users see new
deprecations and can report their experience with them before everyone
sees them. For example, this reduces the number of people who have to
deal with #3822.
- This allows people to defer responding to each new batch of
deprecations and instead do it at once. This means we should
reconsider #3616.
The one risk is people who don't follow blog posts and guides having a
harder time upgrading to the next breaking release without the warnings
on by default. For these users, we reserve the right to make the
`deprecated` feature `default`. This is most likely to happen in a
minor release that is released in conjunction with the next major
release (e.g. when releasing 4.0.0, we release a 3.3.0 that enables
deprecations by default). By using a feature, users can still disable
this if they want.
Thanks @joshtriplett for the idea
Though this is changing an API item we export, we do not consider this a
breaking change because
- This was an implementation detail of the macros and people shouldn't be using it directly
- The `macro_rules` macro is coupled to `clap` because they are in the
same crate
- The derive macro is coupled to `clap` because `clap` declares a
`=x.y.z` dependency on `clap_derive
Fixes#3828
- This matches the more container-like naming we are aiming for
- This provides an opportunity to warn people about moving away from
`ArgAction::IncOcccurrences` for flags, like the deprecation for
`ArgMatches::occurrences_of` to help people migrate in preparation for
clap 4 (rather than having the behavior change subtly in a way only
caught by thorough tests)
In addition, I feel `contains_id` has less ambiguous meaning than
`is_present`.
Someone should not reasonably expect a coun flag to go up to billions,
millions, or even thousands. 255 should be sufficient for anyone,
right?
The original type was selected to be consistent with
`ArgMatches::occurrences_of` but that is also used for tracking how
many values appear which can be large with `xargs`.
I'm still conflicted on what the "right type" is an wish we could
support any numeric type. When I did a search on github though, every
case was for debug/quiet flags and only supported 2-3 occurrences,
making a `u8` overkill.
This came out of a discussion on #3792
With `AnyValueParser` now private, we can also make `AnyValue` private.
Most users should not need to call `ValueParser::parse_ref` and doing
this gives us more implementation freedom for the future.
I'm a bit disappointed we don't have a way to control the action for the
help subcommand. Instead, people will need to provide their own and
disable ours. Long term, I want to design actions for subcommands but I
don't think its worth keeping `NoAutoHelp` around for it.
We aren't enumerating arguments but values for an argument, so the name
should reflect that.
This will be important as part of #1807 when we have more specific
attribute names.
This mostly exist for
- Knowing of the value came from the command-line but we now have
`ArgMatches::source`
- Counting the number of flags but we now have `ArgAction::Count`
This shouldn't be needed anymore now that this is effectively the new
behavior for the non-deprecated actions.
This was briefly talked about in
https://github.com/clap-rs/clap/discussions/2627 but I wasn't familiar
enough with the implementation to know how safe it is. Now, maintainrs
and users can be more confident because they are explicitly opting into
it.
See also #3795
Dropping these will help simplify a lot, including removing of
occurrences.
These come at the cost of the derive not yet supporting types that impl
`From`.
This is a follow up to #3420. Its easy to overlook this because it is only
useful for the conditionals (we actually prevent applying unconditional
defaults to unconditional requireds). This became apparent with the
increased use of defaults with `SetTrue`.
As always, there is the question of when is a bug fix a breaking change.
I'm going to consider this safe since we prevent some instances of this
from even happening and we already did #3420 and this is in line with
those.
Originally I hid all, assuming the flag-only use case but we had to
prevent that from showing up anyways. For the takes_value case, we
should be showing something since we know what it accepts. I decided to
only show the most basic values and hide the rest so as to not overwhelm
the user with redundant options and hope the user recognizes they are
redundant.
