hush_test: ignore generated files

[oweals/busybox.git] / docs / style-guide.txt

diff --git a/docs/style-guide.txt b/docs/style-guide.txt
index 72d3b9375f7e5384e16d90615c9e4716474e94c4..7560d698623357a12b3ead68a05eb00ecfbab8bd 100644 (file)
--- a/docs/style-guide.txt
+++ b/docs/style-guide.txt
@@ -16,29 +16,34 @@ right formatting rules to your file. Please _do_not_ run this on all the files
 in the directory, just your own.
 
 
 in the directory, just your own.
 
 

+

 Declaration Order
 -----------------
 
 Declaration Order
 -----------------
 

-Here is the order in which code should be laid out in a file:
+Here is the preferred order in which code should be laid out in a file:

 
 

+ - commented program name and one-line description

  - commented author name and email address(es)
  - commented GPL boilerplate
  - commented author name and email address(es)
  - commented GPL boilerplate

- - commented description of program
- - #includes and #defines
- - const and globals variables
+ - commented longer description / notes for the program (if needed)
+ - #includes of .h files with angle brackets (<>) around them
+ - #includes of .h files with quotes ("") around them
+ - #defines (if any, note the section below titled "Avoid the Preprocessor")
+ - const and global variables

  - function declarations (if necessary)
  - function implementations
 
 
  - function declarations (if necessary)
  - function implementations
 
 

-Whitespace
-----------
+
+Whitespace and Formatting
+-------------------------

 
 This is everybody's favorite flame topic so let's get it out of the way right
 up front.
 
 
 
 This is everybody's favorite flame topic so let's get it out of the way right
 up front.
 
 

-Tabs vs Spaces in Line Indentation
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+Tabs vs. Spaces in Line Indentation
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
 The preference in Busybox is to indent lines with tabs. Do not indent lines
 with spaces and do not indents lines using a mixture of tabs and spaces. (The
 
 The preference in Busybox is to indent lines with tabs. Do not indent lines
 with spaces and do not indents lines using a mixture of tabs and spaces. (The


@@ -46,17 +51,17 @@ indentation style in the Apache and Postfix source does this sort of thing:
 \s\s\s\sif (expr) {\n\tstmt; --ick.) The only exception to this rule is
 multi-line comments that use an asterisk at the beginning of each line, i.e.:
 
 \s\s\s\sif (expr) {\n\tstmt; --ick.) The only exception to this rule is
 multi-line comments that use an asterisk at the beginning of each line, i.e.:
 

-       /t/*
-       /t * This is a block comment.
-       /t * Note that it has multiple lines
-       /t * and that the beginning of each line has a tab plus a space
-       /t * except for the opening '/*' line where the slash
-       /t * is used instead of a space.
-       /t */
+       \t/*
+       \t * This is a block comment.
+       \t * Note that it has multiple lines
+       \t * and that the beginning of each line has a tab plus a space
+       \t * except for the opening '/*' line where the slash
+       \t * is used instead of a space.
+       \t */

 
 Furthermore, The preference is that tabs be set to display at four spaces
 wide, but the beauty of using only tabs (and not spaces) at the beginning of
 
 Furthermore, The preference is that tabs be set to display at four spaces
 wide, but the beauty of using only tabs (and not spaces) at the beginning of

-lines is that you can set your editor to display tabs at *watever* number of
+lines is that you can set your editor to display tabs at *whatever* number of

 spaces is desired and the code will still look fine.
 
 
 spaces is desired and the code will still look fine.
 
 


@@ -76,7 +81,7 @@ Put spaces between terms and operators. Example:
        While it extends the line a bit longer, the spaced version is more
        readable. An allowable exception to this rule is the situation where
        excluding the spacing makes it more obvious that we are dealing with a
        While it extends the line a bit longer, the spaced version is more
        readable. An allowable exception to this rule is the situation where
        excluding the spacing makes it more obvious that we are dealing with a

-       single term (even if it is a compund term) such as:
+       single term (even if it is a compound term) such as:

 
                if (str[idx] == '/' && str[idx-1] != '\\')
 
 
                if (str[idx] == '/' && str[idx-1] != '\\')
 


@@ -89,27 +94,55 @@ Bracket Spacing
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 If an opening bracket starts a function, it should be on the
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 If an opening bracket starts a function, it should be on the

-next line with no spacing before it. However, if a bracet follows an opening
+next line with no spacing before it. However, if a bracket follows an opening

 control block, it should be on the same line with a single space (not a tab)
 control block, it should be on the same line with a single space (not a tab)

-between it and the opening control block statment. Examples:
+between it and the opening control block statement. Examples:

 
        Don't do this:
 
 
        Don't do this:
 

+               while (!done)
+               {
+
+               do
+               {
+
+       Don't do this either:
+

                while (!done){
                while (!done){

+

                do{
 
                do{
 

+       And for heaven's sake, don't do this:
+
+               while (!done)
+                 {
+
+               do
+                 {
+

        Do this instead:
 
                while (!done) {
        Do this instead:
 
                while (!done) {

+

                do {
 
                do {
 

+If you have long logic statements that need to be wrapped, then uncuddling
+the bracket to improve readability is allowed. Generally, this style makes
+it easier for reader to notice that 2nd and following lines are still
+inside 'if':

 
 

-Paren Spacing
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+               if (some_really_long_checks && some_other_really_long_checks
+                && some_more_really_long_checks
+                && even_more_of_long_checks
+               ) {
+                       do_foo_now;
+
+Spacing around Parentheses
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
 

-Put a space between C keywords and left parens, but not between
-function names and the left paren that starts it's parameter list (whether it
-is being declared or called). Examples:
+Put a space between C keywords and left parens, but not between function names
+and the left paren that starts it's parameter list (whether it is being
+declared or called). Examples:

 
        Don't do this:
 
 
        Don't do this:
 


@@ -121,18 +154,31 @@ is being declared or called). Examples:
                while (foo) {
                for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
 
                while (foo) {
                for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
 

-       Do functions like this:
+       But do functions like this:

 
                static int my_func(int foo, char bar)
                ...
                baz = my_func(1, 2);
 
 
                static int my_func(int foo, char bar)
                ...
                baz = my_func(1, 2);
 

+Also, don't put a space between the left paren and the first term, nor between
+the last arg and the right paren.
+
+       Don't do this:
+
+               if ( x < 1 )
+               strcmp( thisstr, thatstr )
+
+       Do this instead:
+
+               if (x < 1)
+               strcmp(thisstr, thatstr)
+

 
 Cuddled Elses
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 
 Cuddled Elses
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 

-Also, please "cuddle" your else statments by putting the else keyword on the
-same line after the right bracket that closes an 'if' statment.
+Also, please "cuddle" your else statements by putting the else keyword on the
+same line after the right bracket that closes an 'if' statement.

 
        Don't do this:
 
 
        Don't do this:
 


@@ -151,77 +197,419 @@ same line after the right bracket that closes an 'if' statment.
                stmt;
        }
 
                stmt;
        }
 

+The exception to this rule is if you want to include a comment before the else
+block. Example:
+
+       if (foo) {
+               stmts...
+       }
+       /* otherwise, we're just kidding ourselves, so re-frob the input */
+       else {
+               other_stmts...
+       }
+
+
+Labels
+~~~~~~
+
+Labels should start at the beginning of the line, not indented to the block
+level (because they do not "belong" to block scope, only to whole function).
+
+       if (foo) {
+               stmt;
+ label:
+               stmt2;
+               stmt;
+       }
+
+(Putting label at position 1 prevents diff -p from confusing label for function
+name, but it's not a policy of busybox project to enforce such a minor detail).
+
+

 
 Variable and Function Names
 ---------------------------
 
 Use the K&R style with names in all lower-case and underscores occasionally
 
 Variable and Function Names
 ---------------------------
 
 Use the K&R style with names in all lower-case and underscores occasionally

-used to seperate words (e.g. "variable_name" and "numchars" are both
+used to separate words (e.g., "variable_name" and "numchars" are both

 acceptable). Using underscores makes variable and function names more readable
 because it looks like whitespace; using lower-case is easy on the eyes.
 
 acceptable). Using underscores makes variable and function names more readable
 because it looks like whitespace; using lower-case is easy on the eyes.
 

-Note: The Busybox codebase is very much a mixture of code gathered from a
-variety of locations. This explains why the current codebase contains such a
-plethora of different naming styles (Java, Pascal, K&R, just-plain-weird,
-etc.). The K&R guideline explained above should therefore be used on new files
-that are added to the repository. Furthermore, the maintainer of an existing
-file that uses alternate naming conventions should -- at his own convenience
--- convert those names over to K&R style; converting variable names is a very
-low priority task. Perhaps in the future we will include some magical Perl
-script that can go through and convert files--left as an exersize to the
-reader.
+       Frowned upon:

 
 

+               hitList
+               TotalChars
+               szFileName
+               pf_Nfol_TriState

 
 

-Tip and Pointers
-----------------
+       Preferred:
+
+               hit_list
+               total_chars
+               file_name
+               sensible_name
+
+Exceptions:
+
+ - Enums, macros, and constant variables are occasionally written in all
+   upper-case with words optionally seperatedy by underscores (i.e. FIFO_TYPE,
+   ISBLKDEV()).
+
+ - Nobody is going to get mad at you for using 'pvar' as the name of a
+   variable that is a pointer to 'var'.
+
+
+Converting to K&R
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The Busybox codebase is very much a mixture of code gathered from a variety of
+sources. This explains why the current codebase contains such a hodge-podge of
+different naming styles (Java, Pascal, K&R, just-plain-weird, etc.). The K&R
+guideline explained above should therefore be used on new files that are added
+to the repository. Furthermore, the maintainer of an existing file that uses
+alternate naming conventions should, at his own convenience, convert those
+names over to K&R style. Converting variable names is a very low priority
+task.
+
+If you want to do a search-and-replace of a single variable name in different
+files, you can do the following in the busybox directory:
+
+       $ perl -pi -e 's/\bOldVar\b/new_var/g' *.[ch]
+
+If you want to convert all the non-K&R vars in your file all at once, follow
+these steps:
+
+ - In the busybox directory type 'examples/mk2knr.pl files-to-convert'. This
+   does not do the actual conversion, rather, it generates a script called
+   'convertme.pl' that shows what will be converted, giving you a chance to
+   review the changes beforehand.
+
+ - Review the 'convertme.pl' script that gets generated in the busybox
+   directory and remove / edit any of the substitutions in there. Please
+   especially check for false positives (strings that should not be
+   converted).
+
+ - Type './convertme.pl same-files-as-before' to perform the actual
+   conversion.
+
+ - Compile and see if everything still works.
+
+Please be aware of changes that have cascading effects into other files. For
+example, if you're changing the name of something in, say utility.c, you
+should probably run 'examples/mk2knr.pl utility.c' at first, but when you run
+the 'convertme.pl' script you should run it on _all_ files like so:
+'./convertme.pl *.[ch]'.
+
+
+
+Avoid The Preprocessor
+----------------------
+
+At best, the preprocessor is a necessary evil, helping us account for platform
+and architecture differences. Using the preprocessor unnecessarily is just
+plain evil.
+
+
+The Folly of #define
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Use 'const <type> var' for declaring constants.
+
+       Don't do this:
+
+               #define CONST 80
+
+       Do this instead, when the variable is in a header file and will be used in
+       several source files:
+
+               enum { CONST = 80 };
+
+Although enum may look ugly to some people, it is better for code size.
+With "const int" compiler may fail to optimize it out and will reserve
+a real storage in rodata for it! (Hopefully, newer gcc will get better
+at it...).  With "define", you have slight risk of polluting namespace
+(#define doesn't allow you to redefine the name in the inner scopes),
+and complex "define" are evaluated each time they uesd, not once
+at declarations like enums. Also, the preprocessor does _no_ type checking
+whatsoever, making it much more error prone.
+
+
+The Folly of Macros
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Use 'static inline' instead of a macro.
+
+       Don't do this:
+
+               #define mini_func(param1, param2) (param1 << param2)
+
+       Do this instead:
+
+               static inline int mini_func(int param1, param2)
+               {
+                       return (param1 << param2);
+               }
+
+Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros. They provide type
+safety, have no length limitations, no formatting limitations, have an actual
+return value, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros. Besides, really long
+macros with backslashes at the end of each line are ugly as sin.
+
+
+The Folly of #ifdef
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Code cluttered with ifdefs is difficult to read and maintain. Don't do it.
+Instead, put your ifdefs at the top of your .c file (or in a header), and
+conditionally define 'static inline' functions, (or *maybe* macros), which are
+used in the code.
+
+       Don't do this:
+
+               ret = my_func(bar, baz);
+               if (!ret)
+                       return -1;
+               #ifdef CONFIG_FEATURE_FUNKY
+                       maybe_do_funky_stuff(bar, baz);
+               #endif
+
+       Do this instead:
+
+       (in .h header file)
+
+               #if ENABLE_FEATURE_FUNKY
+               static inline void maybe_do_funky_stuff(int bar, int baz)
+               {
+                       /* lotsa code in here */
+               }
+               #else
+               static inline void maybe_do_funky_stuff(int bar, int baz) {}
+               #endif

 
 

-The following are simple coding guidelines that should be followed:
+       (in the .c source file)

 
 

- - When in doubt about the propper behavior of a busybox program (output,
-   formatting, options, etc.), model it after the equivalent GNU program.
-   Doesn't matter how that program behaves on some other flavor of *NIX;
-   doesn't matter what the POSIX standard says or doesn't say, just model
-   busybox programs after their GNU counterparts and nobody has to get hurt.
+               ret = my_func(bar, baz);
+               if (!ret)
+                       return -1;
+               maybe_do_funky_stuff(bar, baz);

 
 

- - Don't use a '#define var 80' when you can use 'static const int var 80'
-   instead. This makes the compiler do typechecking for you (rather than
-   relying on the more error-prone preprocessor) and it makes debugging
-   programs much easier since the value of the variable can be easily queried.
+The great thing about this approach is that the compiler will optimize away
+the "no-op" case (the empty function) when the feature is turned off.

 
 

- - If a const variable is used in only one function, do not make it global to
-   the file. Instead, declare it inside the function body.
+Note also the use of the word 'maybe' in the function name to indicate
+conditional execution.

 
 

- - Inside applet files, all functions should be declared static so as to keep
-   the global namespace clean. The only exception to this rule is the
-   "applet_main" function which must be declared extern.

 
 

- - If you write a function that performs a task that could be useful outside
-   the immediate file, turn it into a general-purpose function with no ties to
-   any applet and put it in the utility.c file instead.

 
 

- - Put all help/usage messages in usage.c. Put other strings in messages.c
-   (Side Note: we might want to use a single file instead of two, food for
-   thought).
+Notes on Strings
+----------------
+
+Strings in C can get a little thorny. Here's some guidelines for dealing with
+strings in Busybox. (There is surely more that could be added to this
+section.)
+
+
+String Files
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Put all help/usage messages in usage.c. Put other strings in messages.c.
+Putting these strings into their own file is a calculated decision designed to
+confine spelling errors to a single place and aid internationalization
+efforts, if needed. (Side Note: we might want to use a single file - maybe
+called 'strings.c' - instead of two, food for thought).
+

 
 

- - There's a right way and a wrong way to test for sting equivalence with
-   strcmp:
+Testing String Equivalence
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+There's a right way and a wrong way to test for sting equivalence with
+strcmp():

 
        The wrong way:
 
 
        The wrong way:
 

-       if (!strcmp(string, "foo")) {
-               ...
+               if (!strcmp(string, "foo")) {
+                       ...

 
        The right way:
 
 
        The right way:
 

-       if (strcmp(string, "foo") == 0){
-               ...
+               if (strcmp(string, "foo") == 0){
+                       ...
+
+The use of the "equals" (==) operator in the latter example makes it much more
+obvious that you are testing for equivalence. The former example with the
+"not" (!) operator makes it look like you are testing for an error. In a more
+perfect world, we would have a streq() function in the string library, but
+that ain't the world we're living in.
+
+
+Avoid Dangerous String Functions
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Unfortunately, the way C handles strings makes them prone to overruns when
+certain library functions are (mis)used. The following table  offers a summary
+of some of the more notorious troublemakers:
+
+function     overflows                  preferred
+-------------------------------------------------
+strcpy       dest string                safe_strncpy
+strncpy      may fail to 0-terminate dst safe_strncpy
+strcat       dest string                strncat
+gets         string it gets             fgets
+getwd        buf string                 getcwd
+[v]sprintf   str buffer                 [v]snprintf
+realpath     path buffer                use with pathconf
+[vf]scanf    its arguments              just avoid it
+
+
+The above is by no means a complete list. Be careful out there.
+
+
+
+Avoid Big Static Buffers
+------------------------
+
+First, some background to put this discussion in context: static buffers look
+like this in code:
+
+       /* in a .c file outside any functions */
+       static char buffer[BUFSIZ]; /* happily used by any function in this file,
+                                       but ick! big! */
+
+The problem with these is that any time any busybox app is run, you pay a
+memory penalty for this buffer, even if the applet that uses said buffer is
+not run. This can be fixed, thusly:
+
+       static char *buffer;
+       ...
+       other_func()
+       {
+               strcpy(buffer, lotsa_chars); /* happily uses global *buffer */
+       ...
+       foo_main()
+       {
+               buffer = xmalloc(sizeof(char)*BUFSIZ);
+       ...
+
+However, this approach trades bss segment for text segment. Rather than
+mallocing the buffers (and thus growing the text size), buffers can be
+declared on the stack in the *_main() function and made available globally by
+assigning them to a global pointer thusly:
+
+       static char *pbuffer;
+       ...
+       other_func()
+       {
+               strcpy(pbuffer, lotsa_chars); /* happily uses global *pbuffer */
+       ...
+       foo_main()
+       {
+               char *buffer[BUFSIZ]; /* declared locally, on stack */
+               pbuffer = buffer;     /* but available globally */
+       ...
+
+This last approach has some advantages (low code size, space not used until
+it's needed), but can be a problem in some low resource machines that have
+very limited stack space (e.g., uCLinux).
+
+A macro is declared in busybox.h that implements compile-time selection
+between xmalloc() and stack creation, so you can code the line in question as
+
+               RESERVE_CONFIG_BUFFER(buffer, BUFSIZ);
+
+and the right thing will happen, based on your configuration.
+
+Another relatively new trick of similar nature is explained
+in keep_data_small.txt.
+
+
+
+Miscellaneous Coding Guidelines
+-------------------------------
+
+The following are important items that don't fit into any of the above
+sections.
+
+
+Model Busybox Applets After GNU Counterparts
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+When in doubt about the proper behavior of a Busybox program (output,
+formatting, options, etc.), model it after the equivalent GNU program.
+Doesn't matter how that program behaves on some other flavor of *NIX; doesn't
+matter what the POSIX standard says or doesn't say, just model Busybox
+programs after their GNU counterparts and it will make life easier on (nearly)
+everyone.
+
+The only time we deviate from emulating the GNU behavior is when:
+
+       - We are deliberately not supporting a feature (such as a command line
+         switch)
+       - Emulating the GNU behavior is prohibitively expensive (lots more code
+         would be required, lots more memory would be used, etc.)
+       - The difference is minor or cosmetic
+
+A note on the 'cosmetic' case: output differences might be considered
+cosmetic, but if the output is significant enough to break other scripts that
+use the output, it should really be fixed.
+
+
+Scope
+~~~~~
+
+If a const variable is used only in a single source file, put it in the source
+file and not in a header file. Likewise, if a const variable is used in only
+one function, do not make it global to the file. Instead, declare it inside
+the function body. Bottom line: Make a conscious effort to limit declarations
+to the smallest scope possible.
+
+Inside applet files, all functions should be declared static so as to keep the
+global name space clean. The only exception to this rule is the "applet_main"
+function which must be declared extern.
+
+If you write a function that performs a task that could be useful outside the
+immediate file, turn it into a general-purpose function with no ties to any
+applet and put it in the utility.c file instead.

 
 

-       The use of the "equals" (==) operator in the latter example makes it much
-       more obvious that you are testing for equivalence. The former example with
-       the "not" (!) operator makes it look like you are testing for an error.

 
 

- - Do not use old-style function declarations that declare variable types
-   between the parameter list and opening bracket. Example:
+Brackets Are Your Friends
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Please use brackets on all if and else statements, even if it is only one
+line. Example:
+
+       Don't do this:
+
+               if (foo)
+                       stmt1;
+               stmt2
+               stmt3;
+
+       Do this instead:
+
+               if (foo) {
+                       stmt1;
+               }
+               stmt2
+               stmt3;
+
+The "bracketless" approach is error prone because someday you might add a line
+like this:
+
+               if (foo)
+                       stmt1;
+                       new_line();
+               stmt2;
+               stmt3;
+
+And the resulting behavior of your program would totally bewilder you. (Don't
+laugh, it happens to us all.) Remember folks, this is C, not Python.
+
+
+Function Declarations
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Do not use old-style function declarations that declare variable types between
+the parameter list and opening bracket. Example:

 
        Don't do this:
 
 
        Don't do this:
 


@@ -237,33 +625,90 @@ The following are simple coding guidelines that should be followed:
                {
                        ....
 
                {
                        ....
 

- - Please use brackets on all if and else statements, even if it is only one
-   line. Example:
+The only time you would ever need to use the old declaration syntax is to
+support ancient, antediluvian compilers. To our good fortune, we have access
+to more modern compilers and the old declaration syntax is neither necessary
+nor desired.

 
 

-       Don't do this:

 
 

-               if (foo)
-                       stmt;
-               else
-                       stmt;
+Emphasizing Logical Blocks
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
 

-       Do this instead:
+Organization and readability are improved by putting extra newlines around
+blocks of code that perform a single task. These are typically blocks that
+begin with a C keyword, but not always.

 
 

-               if (foo) {
-                       stmt;
-               } else {
-                       stmt;
+Furthermore, you should put a single comment (not necessarily one line, just
+one comment) before the block, rather than commenting each and every line.
+There is an optimal amount of commenting that a program can have; you can
+comment too much as well as too little.
+
+A picture is really worth a thousand words here, the following example
+illustrates how to emphasize logical blocks:
+
+       while (line = xmalloc_fgets(fp)) {
+
+               /* eat the newline, if any */
+               chomp(line);
+
+               /* ignore blank lines */
+               if (strlen(file_to_act_on) == 0) {
+                       continue;

                }
 
                }
 

-       The "bracketless" approach is error prone because someday you might add a
-       line like this:
+               /* if the search string is in this line, print it,
+                * unless we were told to be quiet */
+               if (strstr(line, search) && !be_quiet) {
+                       puts(line);
+               }

 
 

-               if (foo)
-                       stmt;
-                       new_line();
-               else
-                       stmt;
+               /* clean up */
+               free(line);
+       }
+
+
+Processing Options with getopt
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+If your applet needs to process command-line switches, please use getopt32() to
+do so. Numerous examples can be seen in many of the existing applets, but
+basically it boils down to two things: at the top of the .c file, have this
+line in the midst of your #includes, if you need to parse long options:
+
+       #include <getopt.h>
+
+Then have long options defined:
+
+       static const struct option <applet>_long_options[] = {
+               { "list",    0, NULL, 't' },
+               { "extract", 0, NULL, 'x' },
+               { NULL, 0, NULL, 0 }
+       };
+
+And a code block similar to the following near the top of your applet_main()
+routine:
+
+       char *str_b;
+
+       opt_complementary = "cryptic_string";
+       applet_long_options = <applet>_long_options; /* if you have them */
+       opt = getopt32(argc, argv, "ab:c", &str_b);
+       if (opt & 1) {
+               handle_option_a();
+       }
+       if (opt & 2) {
+               handle_option_b(str_b);
+       }
+       if (opt & 4) {
+               handle_option_c();
+       }
+
+If your applet takes no options (such as 'init'), there should be a line
+somewhere in the file reads:
+
+       /* no options, no getopt */
+
+That way, when people go grepping to see which applets need to be converted to
+use getopt, they won't get false positives.

 
 

-       And the resulting behavior of your program would totally bewilder you.
-       (Don't laugh, it happens to us all.) Remember folks, this is C, not
-       Python.
+For more info and examples, examine getopt32.c, tar.c, wget.c etc.