in reply to GetOpt::Long usage style

This kind of redundancy has never really bothered me. I usually use Getopt::Long in conjunction with Pod::Usage and my 'skeleton' usually looks like: 
use Getopt::Long;
use Pod::Usage;

our ($user,$pass,$numb,$help);

GetOptions(
   'user|u=s'    => \$user,
   'pass|p=s'    => \$pass,
   'numb|n=i'    => \$numb,
   'help|h|?'    => \$help,
);

$numb ||= 42;
pod2usage(-verbose=>2) if $help;
pod2usage(-verbose=>1) unless $user and $pass;

__END__

[download]
Considering that the variables used to hold user options are being shared across two (or more) packages, this doesn't seem overly redundant to me. But that's just me. ;)

UPDATE: hmmm, here is something evil: 

our ($user,$pass,$numb,$help);
my @tmpl = (
   'user|u=s',
   'pass|p=s',
   'numb|n=i',
   'help|h|?',
);

@tmpl = map {"'$_' => \\\$@{[(split('\|',$_))[0]]},"} @tmpl;
eval "GetOptions(@tmpl);";

[download]

jeffa

L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: GetOpt::Long usage style
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Mar 09, 2003 at 01:16 UTC
    No eval, complies with strict: 
    our ($user,$pass,$numb,$help);

my @cmdopt = (
   [qw(user u=s)],
   [qw(pass p=s)],
   [qw(numb n=i)],
   [qw(help h ?)],
);

GetOptions(map { +(join '|', @$_) => *{$main::{$_->[0]}}{SCALAR} } @cm
+dopt);

    [download]
    It will even bomb out if your variable and option names mismatch: 
    Use of uninitialized value in ref-to-glob cast at t.pl line ##.
Can't use string ("") as a symbol ref while "strict refs" in use at t.pl line ##.
    Of course, this assumes that the variables live in package main. If you need them elsewhere, the $main:: bit will need adjustment. It is possible to generalize even that bit, but that requires some painful twisting - or disabling the ref stricture.

    Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Meditations