google / benchmark / 1066

92%

Pull #435

travis-ci

<a href="https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/<a class=hub.com/google/benchmark/commit/693680343e4f4846ffc1786e58892a228b21d9ef">693680343<a href="https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/693680343e4f4846ffc1786e58892a228b21d9ef">&quot;&gt;compare_bench.py: fixup benchmark_options.

https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/</a><a class="double-link" href="https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/<a class="double-link" href="https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/2373382284918fda13f726aefd6e2f700784797f">237338228</a>">237338228</a><a href="https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/693680343e4f4846ffc1786e58892a228b21d9ef">
reworked parsing, and introduced a regression
in handling of the optional options that
should be passed to both of the benchmarks.

Now, unless the *first* optional argument starts with
&#39;-&#39;, it would just complain about that argument:
	Unrecognized positional argument arguments: &#39;[&#39;q&#39;]&#39;
which is wrong. However if some dummy arg like &#39;-q&#39; was
passed first, it would then happily passthrough them all...

This commit fixes benchmark_options behavior, by
restoring original passthrough behavior for all
the optional positional arguments.

1401 of 1614 relevant lines covered (86.8%)

3547025.89 hits per line