Commit 45b1d6a8 authored by Fred Drake's avatar Fred Drake

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.
parent e1fd5260
...@@ -29,7 +29,14 @@ recognize, with options that require an argument followed by a colon ...@@ -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 names of the long options which should be supported. The leading
\code{'-}\code{-'} characters should not be included in the option \code{'-}\code{-'} characters should not be included in the option
name. Long options which require an argument should be followed by an 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 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 \code{(\var{option}, \var{value})} pairs; the second is the list of
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment