From: Philip Oakley Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 20:16:48 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] doc: add documentation for OPT_STRING_LIST Message-ID: <254445096AD0412287CBB994E8BCA043@PhilipOakley> In-Reply-To: From: "Junio C Hamano" v3 1/5] doc: add documentation for OPT_STRING_LIST > Jacob Keller writes: > >> From: Jacob Keller >> >> Commit c8ba16391655 ("parse-options: add OPT_STRING_LIST helper", >> 2011-06-09) added the OPT_STRING_LIST as a way to accumulate a repeated >> list of strings. However, this was not documented in the >> api-parse-options documentation. Add documentation now so that future >> developers may learn of its existence. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller >> --- >> Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt >> b/Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt >> index 27bd701c0d68..6914f54f5f44 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt >> @@ -168,6 +168,11 @@ There are some macros to easily define options: >> Introduce an option with string argument. >> The string argument is put into `str_var`. >> >> +`OPT_STRING_LIST(short, long, &list, arg_str, description)`:: >> + Introduce an option with string argument. >> + The string argument is stored as an element in `&list` which must be a >> + struct string_list. Reset the list using `--no-option`. >> + > > I do not know if it is clear enough that 'option' in the last > sentence is a placeholder. I then wondered if spelling it as > `--no-` would make it a bit clearer, but that is ugly. Bikeshedding:: `--no-