[Chicken-users] args-doc: Formatting GNU-style help messages

[Ivan Shmakov]

       I'm glad to announce the version 0.1 of args-doc, the facility
       dedicated to format usage messages for GNU Coding
       Standards-compliant command line interfaces.

       The facility aims to complement SRFI 37: a program argument
       processor.

       The extension is available from ``Eggs Unlimited'':

http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/eggs/args-doc.html
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/eggs/args-doc.egg

       (I would like to thank Felix again for taking the effort on
       putting the plain text README on the wiki.)

* TODO

       The issues still open are as follows.

       * Documentation.

       * Support for more Scheme implementations.

       * The `args-doc:program-short-name' should be initialized with
         the name of a program or a script being run, and not to `#f'.

       * Convenience functions to be used as SRFI 37 option processors
         for GNU Standards-compliant `--usage', `--help' and
         `--version' options.  A function to return ready to use
         `args-doc-section' with the aforementioned options.

       * Data structure.  Should `args-doc-section' return a value of a
         separate type?  The same question for the section's entry.

* Future work.

       The issues above are to be resolved.

       I'll try to support several Scheme implementations.  The next
       one will probably be Scheme48, with which I'm quite familiar.
       Should SLIB support SRFI 37, I'll ask for this facility to be
       included in it as well.

       On which other Scheme implementations it would be nice to have
       args-doc?

       Would this facility be ported to different Scheme
       implementations, which format should I choose for the
       documentation?  Both Scheme48 Reference Manual and the SLIB
       manual use Texinfo.  On the other hand, it's a considerable
       effort to make a .texi into a guidelines-conforming HTML for an
       egg.

       Should this facility prove to be useful, and if the time will
       permit, I'll propose an SRFI for it.

       One more part for a complete Argp replacement is the facility to
       ``combine'' several ``parsers'' into one.  Once implemented, it
       will allow library developers to ship ready to use option
       parsers, which could be used by application developers to
       provide a consistent command line interface with respect to the
       abstraction implemented in a library.

       It's a simple task, though not as simple as concatenating the
       option lists.

       Thus, the libraries needed to provide a facility comparable to
       Argp are as follows:

       * args-fold, to process the arguments;

       * args-doc, to document the options;

       * a library yet to be written, to ``merge'' several sets of
         options into one set, to be used with both `args-fold' and
         `args-doc'.

       Any volunteers to work on the last one?