"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sorry, I meant that in both cases it will expose the same options to the > user: --blank-line and --no-blank-line. I.e. if you create options > named: > > "x" "x-y" > > Their negations are: --no-x and --no-x-y. But if their names are: > > "x" "no-x" > > The negations are: > > --no-x and --x > > But as your example shows that's unrelated to whether the *variable in > the code* is negated. > > So however you structure the code, which would be: > > int blankline = 1: > [...] > OPT_BOOL(0, "blankline", &blankline, [...]); > > Or: > > int no_blankline = 0: > [...] > OPT_BOOL(0, "no-blankline", &no_blankline, [...]); > > The documentation could in both cases say: > > --no-blankline: > describe the non-default[...] Thank you for the detailed explanation, now it's clear for me.
