Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] parse-options: make OPT_ARGUMENT() more useful

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

The way it is written, I think the intent is that you would do:

  OPT_ARGUMENT("foo", &saw_foo, ...),
  OPT_ARGUMENT("no-foo", &saw_no_foo, ...),

I'm happy to punt on it until it ever comes up (which I suspect may be
never).

Yeah, having to have one extra element like the above may be ugly
and less optimal API design, but something that is survivable, and
when we actually need to use it, find it too ugly to live, and are
motivated to fix it, it will be fixed, so I won't be too worried
about it, either.