[help-gengetopt] Re: Yet another issue

[Dave Swegen]

On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 17:36 +0100, Lorenzo Bettini wrote:
> Dave Swegen wrote:
> > OK, the following line generates code that seems to incorrectly mark the
> > option as required (which is certainly not my intention):
> > 
> > option "sqn" - "sqn" argoptional multiple string
> > 
> 
> well if you don't want an option to be required you have to specify "no"
> (by default an option is considered as required).  "argoptional",
> instead, means that the argument of that option is optional.

Ah! Suddenly I see the light :)

> 
> I must confess that "no" is quite confusing, and infact I'll add the
> keyword "optional" which is much more explicative (and "required" for
> "yes") :-)

Yes, that would be much more intuitive

Dave
-- 
David Swegen
Consultant                      GPS, Red Hat Europe
m: +44 7734 909630              w: people.redhat.com/dswegen
-----------------------------------------------------------