`--trace` option & New parsing with optional output file argument

[YourMJK]

See discussion: https://github.com/MonoS/SupMover/pull/17#issuecomment-1924849735

• Adds a new --trace option for printing structure and contents of segments
• Makes positional output file argument optional for actions that don't modify the input (like --trace)
• Replaces SEGFAULTs with standard parsing error when user inputs too few arguments
• Inline increment of argument index during parsing to reduce code clutter
• Removes case-insensitivity of options

[MonoS]

Seems fine to me, I'll test it a bit tomorrow and let you know :)

[YourMJK]

@MonoS Did you come around to testing this? Let me know if you want me to change something.

[MonoS]

Did you come around to testing this?

Yeah, i've put some comment in your code, i can see them in this PR before your latest comment.

[YourMJK]

Oh, don't know why but I can't see those unfortunately ¯\(ツ)/¯

[MonoS]

Oh, don't know why but I can't see those unfortunately ¯_(ツ)_/¯

That's probably because I don't know how to use github :)

Anyway:

• The new --trace doesn't have the check for its option without dash
• In the WDS you print both position and size in the same line, i'd split it in Window frame position and Window frame size
• In the WDS we check for multiple windows and report an error, i think we need those output only when doing modification, what do you think?

In any case I can see the code review from this link https://github.com/MonoS/SupMover/pull/18/files/8968b7ce51e5384b9684d1a867d82b3ef87393cb And looks like this

[YourMJK]

That's probably because I don't know how to use github :)

That's fine, I'm not familiar with code review on GitHub either :) But I think you need to click on "Review changes" and then "Submit review" for me to see it. Those comments are still pending (see your screenshot).

• The new --trace doesn't have the check for its option without dash

That was on purpose since it's part of the old syntax and thus doesn't need to be backwards compatible. But for consistency I can of course add that check as well.

Agreed on the other two points!

[YourMJK]

Should be fixed now

[MonoS]

Merged, thank you :)