Re-order and refactor help for client/server validation

[pljones]

Short description of changes

Review and refactor command line handling in src/main.cpp to standardise how it all works.

Context: Fixes an issue?

Was part of #1867 (persistent directory lists) but really is nothing to do with it. Might unnecessarily cause conflicts in that change should src/main.cpp be amended by some other change, if left as part of it.

There's what appears to be a lot of code change - in fact, it's mostly moving existing code around. The main changes are from (new) line 533 onwards.

Does this change need documentation? What needs to be documented and how?

The code change should be self-documenting, I hope.

This change affects the --help output of Jamulus, so any documetation that references that will need reviewing. I have not looked into that aspect.

Status of this Pull Request

Working, tested code.

What is missing until this pull request can be merged?

Needs reviewing as an independent pull request. Had been reviewed under #1867 by @ann0see, I believe. See #1867 (review)

Checklist

• I've verified that this Pull Request follows the general code principles
• I tested my code and it does what I want
• My code follows the style guide
• I waited some time after this Pull Request was opened and all GitHub checks completed without errors.
• I've filled all the content above

[ann0see]

Put on my todo list for review/functionality test; but I can’t guarantee anything

[ann0see]

This change affects the --help output of Jamulus, so any documetation that references that will need reviewing. I have not looked into that aspect.

I think it’s not really used anywhere yet. The CLI page was and is created manually.

[ann0see]

All in all it seems to be quite OK?

Ran "./Jamulus -e" which produced the error message:
./Jamulus: '--directoryserver' needs a string argument.
This might be confusing since we passed -e not --directoryserver. Also the error message with server only options might need some thoughts and tests (In some cases I can't remember "Did you omit --server" was confusing. Maybe ./Jamulus -e -c?).

[softins]

Sorry for the delay - Jamulus is taking a back seat at the moment.

This PR looks ok to me. I agree with @ann0see's comment #1896 (review) regarding the error message. This could be addressed with the following diff:

diff --git a/src/main.cpp b/src/main.cpp
index 0a0a6fcb..e58d5e17 100644
--- a/src/main.cpp
+++ b/src/main.cpp
@@ -942,7 +942,7 @@ bool GetStringArgument ( int argc, char** argv, int& i, QString strShortOpt, QSt
     {
         if ( ++i >= argc )
         {
-            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( QString ( "%1: '%2' needs a string argument." ).arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( strLongOpt ) );
+            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( QString ( "%1: '%2' needs a string argument." ).arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( argv[i-1] ) );
             exit ( 1 );
         }

@@ -970,7 +970,7 @@ bool GetNumericArgument ( int     argc,
         QString errmsg = "%1: '%2' needs a numeric argument between '%3' and '%4'.";
         if ( ++i >= argc )
         {
-            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( errmsg.arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( strLongOpt ).arg ( rRangeStart ).arg ( rRangeStop ) );
+            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( errmsg.arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( argv[i-1] ).arg ( rRangeStart ).arg ( rRangeStop ) );
             exit ( 1 );
         }

@@ -978,7 +978,7 @@ bool GetNumericArgument ( int     argc,
         rValue = strtod ( argv[i], &p );
         if ( *p || ( rValue < rRangeStart ) || ( rValue > rRangeStop ) )
         {
-            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( errmsg.arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( strLongOpt ).arg ( rRangeStart ).arg ( rRangeStop ) );
+            qCritical() << qUtf8Printable ( errmsg.arg ( argv[0] ).arg ( argv[i-1] ).arg ( rRangeStart ).arg ( rRangeStop ) );
             exit ( 1 );
         }

Then the error message would mention the actual option supplied. But I don't feel strongly enough to block the PR for it.

[pljones]

Patched:

peter@fs-peter:~/git/Jamulus-wip$ ./Jamulus -e
./Jamulus: '-e' needs a string argument.

---

And again with format fixes. Bad Tony. Bad. ;)