Comment #2 by andrej.mitrovich — 2013-12-18T09:38:18Z
I guess getopt should check whether the option exists before it tries to separate "-abc" to -a=bc?
Comment #3 by andrei — 2013-12-18T09:42:09Z
This is intentional because arguably the use was incorrectly accepted. The commonly used convention is to either use short (single-letter) options with single dash, or long options (multi-letter) with double dashes.
The use '-test' is currently interpreted as "pass argument est to the single-letter option -t".
That said, a regression is what it is so perhaps we need to continue supporting the old mistake. I'll look into it. Please advise.
Comment #4 by andrej.mitrovich — 2013-12-18T10:23:56Z
(In reply to comment #3)
> This is intentional because arguably the use was incorrectly accepted. The
> commonly used convention is to either use short (single-letter) options with
> single dash, or long options (multi-letter) with double dashes.
>
> The use '-test' is currently interpreted as "pass argument est to the
> single-letter option -t".
I think the OPs point however is that the passThrough option should let *you* handle any unsupported syntax like single-dash long options *after* getopt is done, hence why it should not split up "-test" (if there's no -t option then it should arguably not try to split up -test).