Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Getopt

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Withdrawn. Withdrawn by nominator, clear keep. Suggest rewrite by a more knowlegeable editor to include derivatives and other languages it is included in. (non-admin closure) MacMed^talk _stalk 22:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getopt

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't think that this article is really necessary. We don't need an article for every C library, and this one is completely unreferenced, and does not even have any secondary (blog, etc.) coverage, which is common for a programming language library. Perhaps a transwiki to Wikibooks' C book would be appropriate? MacMed^talk _stalk 20:48, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- MacMed^talk _stalk 20:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This topic passes WP:N. See this article at Devshed.com and these two Google Books entries. Cunard (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Those references are concerning Perl, Perl, and Java respectively. Should this AfD be closed as keep, I would suggest someone more knowledgeable expand the article to mention the variety of languages getopt is available for use in. Regards, MacMed^talk_stalk 01:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - The second and third references both state that the perl and Java versions they describe are based on the C library's interface, so are directly relevant. —Korath (Talk) 01:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've expanded this slightly, but can't see it ever growing beyond stub length. A merge to Command-line argument is probably best. —Korath (Talk) 02:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep sources above, and the article should include java, etc. Verges on a textbook/howto, but I think it can overcome those hurdles. Hobit (talk) 03:46, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per Cunard. Joe Chill (talk) 20:09, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Cunard's sources; article does need almost complete rewrite, but topic is notable. --Cybercobra (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject is clearly quite notable and important to those interested in programming topics and the nomination reasons above are not based on any policies or guidelines. As for editorial issues, the C version is generally considered to be the defacto reference standard when implementing getopt() in other languages and is a very good example to use. That said, the article probably should at least mention some of the other popular implementations. As for additional references, I would suggest starting with books from W. Richard Stevens and Brian Kernighan. Unfortunately the majority of both author's books are not going to be indexed by Google books because they are used as textbooks (and where they are indexed, they generally are not fully viewable [1] [2]). --Tothwolf (talk) 14:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am the editor who originally requested that the previous deletion be reversed. getopt derivatives are available on many languages besides the ones already listed: Python, Ruby, D, Lua, PHP, Lisp, Haskall, BASH, R. Basically, any major programming language that runs POSIX operating system and takes options has a getopt derivative. - Pingveno 20:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.