pacak
pacak
Yea, I'm still thinking about a better way to represent it. common args should probably be inlined inside adjacent groups, but this messes up the formatting. One way would be...
Nice seed. I'll see what I can do about giving more control on rendering. On Tue, Jul 2, 2024, 16:42 ozwaldorf ***@***.***> wrote: > Unfortunately my usecase actually has 2...
Hmm... I'll see what I can do. I'm not really 100% happy with how markdown rendered either.
Yeah, right now this would break it. I have a plan to make it more flexible :)
Hi Scott Thank you for letting me know about the issues. While I do have a bunch of text covering parsing behavior - other parts are not covered as well...
I made some fixes to fish shell completions recently around here, is it before or after? https://github.com/pacak/bpaf/pull/389/commits/baec2fd64ed97dee150204ab40827a44ee1a6d20 If after - you need to regenerate completion files.
> I think there's just a missing space between flox and --arguments Indeed. I'll make a fix for that and release a new `bpaf` version. And will try to figure...
0.9.15 should be out, https://github.com/pacak/bpaf/pull/392
So... There's nothing special about `construct!` macro. All it does is taking several parsers and giving you something that is `impl Parser`. You can use `.to_options().command("foo")` on any other parser...
But you are right, I'll update the `construct!` macro to work with field-less enums and structs - this behavior totally makes sense,