Shorter type names

[joshwcomeau]

Now that I've used this for a while, I find it surprisingly taxing to type out -t functional, or -t pure-class.

Maybe we could shorten them to -t func and -t pure.... or maybe even just -t f and -t p? All of the above?

Open for discussion! cc @morajabi

[morajabi]

What about omiting the --type and doing it like this: -p --pure , -f --func , -c --class ?

[joshwcomeau]

What about omiting the --type and doing it like this: -p --pure , -f --func , -c --class ?

My issue there is that it's unclear that they're mutually exclusive; what if someone does new-component -p -f MyThing?

(It's an easy technical problem to solve - just throw an error if multiple are present - but it still feels a bit unconventional to me. Typically flags are independent from each other).

Thanks for the suggestion, though! Let me know if you know of any popular/mainstream CLI tools that have mutually-exclusive tags like you suggest; maybe I'm worrying over nothing.

Also, sorry for not addressing this sooner! I got busy last week with a side-project, but it's nearing completion. Soon I'll have some time for this project :)

[jelly8173]

It is possible to early return from new-component -p -f NewComponent with explanatory error message