From 45b1d6a8314db3ba41e3d954efa5b9a352e3eec9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fred Drake Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:05:51 +0000 Subject: Explain that long options are matched based on a unique prefix rather than requiring the whole option to be typed out. This closes SF bug #126863. --- Doc/lib/libgetopt.tex | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Doc/lib/libgetopt.tex b/Doc/lib/libgetopt.tex index 6731c32..563460b 100644 --- a/Doc/lib/libgetopt.tex +++ b/Doc/lib/libgetopt.tex @@ -29,7 +29,14 @@ recognize, with options that require an argument followed by a colon names of the long options which should be supported. The leading \code{'-}\code{-'} characters should not be included in the option name. Long options which require an argument should be followed by an -equal sign (\character{=}). +equal sign (\character{=}). To accept only long options, +\var{options} should be an empty string. Long options on the command +line can be recognized so long as they provide a prefix of the option +name that matches exactly one of the accepted options. For example, +it \var{long_options} is \code{['foo', 'frob']}, the option +\longprogramopt{fo} will match as \longprogramopt{foo}, but +\longprogramopt{f} will not match uniquely, so \exception{GetoptError} +will be raised. The return value consists of two elements: the first is a list of \code{(\var{option}, \var{value})} pairs; the second is the list of -- cgit v0.12