I've found a workaround for testing of -F has been given in one go – via
the super cool negation `~`:

QE='zparseopts qqq -F afwe'
print ${QE//(#b)zparseopts(*~*-F*~*-)(-F|)*/°match°}
printf °%s\\n "$match[@]" $?

Output:
°match°
° qqq
°-F
°0

So the -F exists there in $match[3] for testing if it has been given to
zparseopts. The main point is the ~ rejection of -F on part of the input
string:

…(*~*-F*~*-)…

It translates: everything (*) but not -F (~*-F*) and in that subset, also
not dash = (~*-). Without the ~*- it would match "not -F", so "-" from
within it is still allowed:

QE='zparseopts qqq -F afwe'
print ${QE//(#b)zparseopts(*~*-F*)(-F|)*/°match°}
printf °%s\\n "$match[@]" $?

Output:

°match°
° qqq -
°
°0

With it and with ~*-F* it correctly accepts other options:

QE='zparseopts qqq -q -F afwe'
print ${QE//(#b)zparseopts(*~*-F*~*-)(-F|)*/°match°}
printf °%s\\n "$match[@]" $?

Output:

°match°
° qqq -q
°-F
°0

I think that this demonstrates the uniqueness of Zsh pattern negations.
That really should be available in regexps.



On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 14:52, Sebastian Gniazdowski <sgniazdowski@gmail.com>
wrote:

> PS. (#b) is missing in the pattern, correct code is:
> [[ "zparseopts -F" == (#b)*(zparseopts)*~^*(-F)* ]]
> printf →%s\\n $? "$match[@]"
>
> output is the same.
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 14:50, Sebastian Gniazdowski <
> sgniazdowski@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm matching a pattern:
>> [[ "zparseopts -F" == *(zparseopts)*~^*(-F)* ]]
>> printf →%s\\n $? "$match[@]"
>>
>> with output:
>> →0
>> →zparseopts
>> →
>>
>> I would want \3 to contain -F… because, I would once want to use (-F|)
>> there, and be able to test if the option is given… Is it possible?
>>
>> ~^ is a double negation that makes the pattern work like "if-contains
>> zparseopts AND -F"
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Sebastian Gniazdowski
>>
>>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Sebastian Gniazdowski
>
>

-- 
Best regards,
Sebastian Gniazdowski